↳
In-reply-to
»
@eapl.me When it is up and running, I promise to add it to the specification. I will also include some corrections.
The nature of twtxt does not allow us to selectively hide clients. It's a problem not with DM, but with any extension.
@prologic Yes, it is a security hole. All dm-echo messages are readable. I intend it to be a debugging tool. Maybe I can include a warning message. If many of you see that it is a serious problem, I can remove the links.
@xuu It's already much better than Mastodon :P . Maybe we can remove the sender and receiver references with an intermediary register.
⤋ Read More
@prologic@twtxt.net @bender@twtxt.net @eapl.me@eapl.me I think opening another file is a bad idea because it adds complexity to the clients, breaks the single feed and I think keeping legacy clients will be more complex to add new features in the future. A modern approach is important.
I’ll be honest, I’m a bit tired of the fight around the direct message. Perhaps, we can remove it as an extension and use the alternative @prologic@twtxt.net . My suggestion apparently doesn’t like to the community. I have no problem with remove it.