Talk:Distributed Social Network Projects

definitional boundary

Just curious about how we are definiing "Distributed Social Network Projects". My understanding is that "social network" software refers to software that a) allow users to post short messages on the web ("microblogging"), making comments or sharing links, and b) allows users to "friend" or "follow" each other so they can receive, re-share, and perhaps reply to each others posts. A number of the projects now listed in this page are not "social network projects" by this definition, but provide others services such as synchronized remote backup of user files ("cloud storage"), eg ownCloud (FWIW ownCloud appears to be a zombie product whose active developers have moved to a fork called NextCloud, similar to the situation of Apache OpenOffice/ LibreOffice) Strypey (talk) 06:01, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Also, some these projects are may not be "distributed", such as Crabgrass, which AFAIK provides for group collaboration on one server, not a federation of services. Strypey (talk) 06:01, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

I agree with your definition. If we can't discover public posts and follow people, then it's probably more appropriate for P2P Communication Software. --Dvs1 (talk) 15:16, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Hmm. I think "P2P Communication software" is specifically about serverless software where communication is sent directly between two or more peers running the software. 'GNU Social P2P' would fit there, and maybe one or two others. Crabgrass and ownCloud certainly wouldn't. Strypey (talk) 01:00, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

I'll be doing a second pass today. I had the same concerns about the projects you mentioned. --Dvs1 (talk) 15:19, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

dead projects

Lorea was a fork of Elgg, which AFAIK is no longer being developed. StatusNet development continues under the name "GNU Social". which is already on the list. I have moved these to "inactive development". Strypey (talk) 06:01, 13 April 2017 (UTC)