Matt's Dev Log

Testing out ActivityPub mentions, which should work with Mastodon now., does it?

Edit: it does! And it means any fediverse replies to this post will notify me on my Mastodon account, where we can continue the conversation.


Just seeing if this works:


We're working on supporting #ActivityPub mentions in #WriteFreely now (T627). The work is in progress, and last post didn't work.

Testing to see if gets this.

Let's see.

Testing #ActivityPub #mentions in #WriteFreely now (T627). Apparently Mastodon doesn't honor mentions in Articles (they only work with Notes — we've opened #12129 to fix this), so won't work. But Pleroma does honor them, so should work just fine.

Let's see.

This is to test Pherephone, the latest ActivityPub project from

Testing out wf-cli

This is the command-line interface, now working with all WriteFreely instances.

I'm thinking we should bring our various command-line importers (e.g. the text importer and wf-migrate tool) into the main CLI. This fits in line with the file-syncing features we're going to eventually add to the CLI, and enables us to take advantage of certain shared, required features like account authentication. We could even leverage the existing CLI UI for things like choosing which collection to import posts to.

Many of the changes I make are small, quick fixes in response to users — some recent cases are #137 Prevent transliterated slugs exceeding length limit and #138 Don't consider post unpublished when title exists.

They're often quick fixes, taking no more than 10 minutes to fix. I usually deploy them on once they're done and I've verified the fix. I know the software well enough to feel confident deploying new code so quickly, but of course, there are always blind spots.

So I'm going to start making these small changes with pull requests, instead of committing directly to develop. This puts them on the same field as everyone else, and gives everyone visibility into what's going into the codebase (remember, you can watch the GitHub repo to get these notifications, or follow in the fediverse).

This is the main reason I'd like to do it this way — to notify everyone and provide a comment period, rather than a formal code review like we do with larger features.

I'm going to leave these pull requests open for a week, and then merge if no one brings up any issues. If it turns out that the change caused some kind of regression, etc., we can fix it and reference the original pull request.

  • Update documentation
    • Tag release in documentation repo
  • Deploy changes to the Getting Started guide on
  • Tag release in writefreely repo
  • Run make release in the writefreely repo
  • Finish writing changelog in pad
  • Compile the GitHub release
    • Paste the changelog into GitHub
    • Upload the binaries
    • Publish release
  • Paste the changelog into
    • Add links to issues
    • Write extra introduction
    • Link to GitHub release
    • Publish blog post
  • Deploy for Teams application
  • Upgrade instances
  • Boost blog post on Mastodon

Now that we're growing past one core developer, we've moved #WriteFreely development off of master. As I mentioned on Mastodon:

Things are validated. Now all core development is done on feature branches off of develop, with code review before merging. (So, more validated than the master branch used to be.)

Of course, there may be some larger features that get added over several pull requests (thus might need fixes / changes), but in general we're trying to avoid that.