• Zak@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Bluesky’s server federation is more of a backend thing

    Bluesky’s federation doesn’t exist yet. Maybe they’ve written some code, but I can’t self-host something that Bluesky users can follow.

    • Arthur Besse@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Bluesky’s federation doesn’t exist yet. Maybe they’ve written some code, but I can’t self-host something that Bluesky users can follow.

      You can run their code today and federate in their sandbox environment, but yeah, their “production network” still doesn’t federate yet. They said a while ago that the remaining work to be done was mostly around moderation; currently they say they expect to enable federation early next year but they have several other things on their pre-federation TODO now.

      You can find details about their federation sandbox here and here.

      • Zak@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m glad to hear it’s not vaporware. Launching without open federation doesn’t give me a lot of confidence they view it as a core feature.

    • matthewmercury@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Agreed, bsky is currently developing and testing its federation capabilities with multiple servers in-house, which is an elaborate way of scaling but doesn’t actually have the critical necessary component for a federation, ie another entity on the other side. Bsky is the sole operator, administrator, moderator, and arbiter.