user/dev discussion of public-inbox itself
 help / color / Atom feed
* ActivityPub <=> email bridge?
@ 2019-03-30  1:49 Eric Wong
  0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Eric Wong @ 2019-03-30  1:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: meta

Is it worth the effort?

Something tells me that if ActivityPub reaches high-enough
adoption levels; it'll have to deal with a spam problem that
email folks have been dealing with for decades, too.

So ActivityPub seems like a duplicated effort as far as it's use
for messaging for software development goes...

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] only message in thread

only message in thread, back to index

Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-03-30  1:49 ActivityPub <=> email bridge? Eric Wong

user/dev discussion of public-inbox itself

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror http://public-inbox.org/meta
	git clone --mirror http://czquwvybam4bgbro.onion/meta
	git clone --mirror http://hjrcffqmbrq6wope.onion/meta
	git clone --mirror http://ou63pmih66umazou.onion/meta

Newsgroups are available over NNTP:
	nntp://news.public-inbox.org/inbox.comp.mail.public-inbox.meta
	nntp://ou63pmih66umazou.onion/inbox.comp.mail.public-inbox.meta
	nntp://czquwvybam4bgbro.onion/inbox.comp.mail.public-inbox.meta
	nntp://hjrcffqmbrq6wope.onion/inbox.comp.mail.public-inbox.meta
	nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.mail.public-inbox.general

 note: .onion URLs require Tor: https://www.torproject.org/

AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/ public-inbox