76
What do we think of Bluesky now? (lemmy.ml)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/opensource@lemmy.ml
42 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Bluesky had some controversy when it first came out. Now that it's been around for a while, I'm curious what the consensus is. How does it compare to Mastodon? Is Bluesky now self-hostable and compatible with the Fediverse?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Mastodon builds on the ActivityPub protocol with its own API, but the last time I looked into it, the documentation of the API was poor, so it was difficult to develop for.

I haven't looked at the BlueSky docs so I can't compare, but it sticks in my craw a bit seeing the words "friendly for third-party devs" being used in the same sentence with Mastodon

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    Not being a developer myself, the wording may not be the best sorry. The take home message was that Mastodon seems more prone to external development based on its protocol and the fact that more than 20 apps already exist (all platforms included).

    Outside of using several apps to use Mastodon, I personaly rely on its API only to add Mastodon posts as comments on my static blog.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    The ecosystem is not so healthy on the server side, and I think the API documentation is a major factor.
    The project has been sitting on this for many years

    You could say it's an improvement over BlueSky because with Mastodon you can host your own server, but if you don't like their server, then you're out of options

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent