Ryan Barrett

Thinking about this a bit. Bridged accounts aren't normal accounts that you can log into, so having them follow people wouldn't do much. @qazmlp can you think of any user-visible...

> I think it would be enough if you processed the existing unbridged outbound follows that you already know about once when someone opts into bridging to the respective network....

From @elfprince13 in https://github.com/snarfed/bridgy-fed/issues/826#issuecomment-2218108078: > I currently control: > > * @[email protected] (personal Mastodon instance) > * @elfprince13.mumak.app (ATproto/Bluesky account) > > Even a single-user Mastodon instance does not run...

@elfprince13 the other difficulty here is that we currently only support custom fediverse usernames for web sites, not Bluesky accounts. I'm reluctant to add user-level settings, since they'd require an...

Agreed. Bio is awkward and annoying, DNS or HTTP is inaccessible, authed UI is a burden on my end. I haven't heard a good easy (or at least not hard)...

We may be confusing two different things here: custom _domain_ handles, eg `@[email protected]` instead of `@[email protected]`, and custom _usernames_ in handles, eg `@[email protected]`. Let's keep this issue focused on the...

^ done! @frncs-eu: > I don't think the bio approach is a good idea – ideally the user should verify the domain they're claiming, otherwise one could just say they're...

Now that we support DMs/chat, we could let people DM us the domain they want to use for their bridged fediverse address. Easier than a custom authed UI.

Realistically, Bluesky accounts bridged into the fediverse will always start on the `@bsky.brid.gy` domain. So, the next step here is either 1) Migrate the account from `[email protected]` to `@domain@domain` with...

Yes! Not specific to numbers; this is the current behavior when the mentioned user hasn't enabled the bridge. We translate fediverse @-mentions to Bluesky @-mentions, but we don't yet fall...