Basically: GNU Social was a mistake
@noelle Nah, it has some good bits. I used to think poorly of it, as an inherited carcass of a dead platform (StatusNet).
But it's kind of cool that someone is still working on it, that it's a GNU project, and that it has an active userbase. Things could be a lot better in many places, but it looks like things are gradually developing in the right direction.
@deadsuperhero haha, I know. :) Just frustrated with what feels like a foolish consistency in the service of maintaining Mastodon's interoperability with GNUSoc when GNUSoc has no interest in maintaining interoperability with Mastodon.
@noelle I think both projects implicitly understand that they would benefit if they worked together. It really boils down to ego, along with developers pointing fingers over who should be doing what.
It's nothing new, other federated projects have had similar clashes in the past.
@deadsuperhero I don't think you're right about that. I see an awful lot of "it would be nice to implement this but it would break GNUSoc interoperability" from Masto's side and not an awful lot of "we should work with Mastodon to implement this" from GNUSoc's side.
Maybe I'm missing the parts where GNUSoc is paying attention to Mastodon development as a partner and co-project, but I can only speak to what I see.
@noelle Is it a happy or sad mistake?