LogJam porting question: prop_xpost_check

[unixronin]

I'm working on an update to Evan Martin's LogJam client to support the metadata and tag changes on Dreamwidth. I have it mostly ready to go, apart from a few site-specific issues like the cut and user tags, but I'm running into a problem with prop_xpost_check. When I submit a test post that attempts to set the prop_xpost_check property, the submission fails with an 'invalid metadata' error. Is the auto-crossposting feature intended to be usable by remote clients, or is it available only when submitting through the web interface?

Comments

[zvi]

Can I just say that, as a user, you are assuming a split in my behavior (that I either use a client or the web interface) which I don't have, and which I suspect other users don't have.

That is to say, if I crosspost something and then decide it needs editing, I generally decide it needs editing because of the way the entry appears on the reading page or in my journal, and it's pretty common for me to edit the entry in the website interface, even if I originally posted with a client. (Sometimes, if I posted from another computer.)

My model holds true if the "client" I used to post was some other webservice, like e-mail or flicker or a delicious post, so I can see a fairly broad application.

[allen]

Erm, actually, I wasn't assuming anything about user behavior. I was completely forgetting that we even had users, and just thinking about the technical aspects. :)

No, really, the whole client support thing wasn't taken into account in the crossposter design. It will almost certainly be updated at some point, assuming that someone has the time to code it. There will be certain features that would be nice to have that won't get put in for technical reasons. (For instance, taking your example, it would be nice if you could actually edit your crossposts at LJ and have the changes propagate back to the post on DW, but unless LJ wants to update their code, it's not going to happen.) But hopefully it will be something that works for most cases.

[(Anonymous)]

Frankly, I'll be surprised if LJ revises their code to add crosspost support. There's little mileage in them doing so. And if other sites DO start adding crosspost support, it's going to increase the probability of loops, which will probably lead to the need for a formally defined crosspost protocol designed to prevent loops.