Sven Slootweg (soft-deprecated) @joepie91@pixie.town

@TopazRabbit Hmm, where is the ball sourced from (besides their own kits)?

@jhulkko Thanks - it's going to take me a while to read through this, I'm currently reading the "we rewrote Mastodon" post.

So far I'm not really encountering anything new as it seems to all be about the data encapsulation rather than the decoupling of concerns and interoperability (which is the harder part I'm mainly trying to figure out), but perhaps I just haven't gotten to the right section yet :)

The design so far does seem to roughly make sense, so hopefully they also talk about the rest of the owl!

@bananas Well, that is why I'm looking for work that people have done on this :) And I'm specifically looking for something that can transparently integrate into how package management is already done, one way or another

@rtn@chaos.social I'm familiar with it (and have used some of it), but it's not really what I'm looking for in the sense that it doesn't actually solve any of the hard problems!

Sure, the modules are modular, and you *could* manually assemble it into some sort of modular data management setup. But it leaves the "how" of that undefined (especially things like relational integrity), and that is precisely the thing I am trying to work out here 🙂

@alex You've already clarified quite a lot for me, thanks :)

Would be interested in chatting more about this at some later time, when you feel more up to it!

@bananas Basically, you can split up the complexity of an application into many smaller parts by using packages, right? And then reuse those packages across projects, whenever you need the same functionality.

But the glaring issue always ends up being that this doesn't work for anything that deals with persistent state; because database structure is defined on an application level, a library can't make assumptions about it, and if it does, it can very easily conflict with something else in destructive ways.

What I'm looking for is something that allows modularization of persistently stateful systems too - for example, a "user management" library that implements login/registration/session/etc. functionality *and* internally manages the storage of user data, while still allowing you to reference "a user" from, say, an application-specific "threads" table/collection, and have that reference be stable and basically work how you'd expect from a system with relational integrity.

@alex Would carving out your own community space not help to make it easier to find likeminded people?

(Not intended to argue the point, but rather to understand where you're coming from, what your rationale is and what issues you see with that)

@alex Do you mean as in, not wanting to hang around there?

@operand Yep, entirely understandable. Thanks for your answer!

@kae_bytheocean That was probably the massive community management thread by @ifixcoinops?

@rune FWIW, I've definitely seen some upper-class people do this in NL. But only really upper-class people, who can't seem to tolerate a single brown-ish bit of grass.