Feature Discussion: Groups

Don't think this is a priority. We should improve our tag system and the federation first

I agree that federation is a priority, but I also think it's good of you to start this conversation, as I think a lot of people migrating from Facebook would like to have a Groups feature. I could definitely see decentralized groups being useful for things like activism.

I think we would need to add some kind of group type to the federation spec, the question of course points back to this: do we still want to make use of D* federation, or do we want to adopt something else like Tent to build upon (that's for our federation discussion though).

AFAIK, the javascript used for Pistos' Groups feature would need to be completely redone in Backbone.

If we can get it from the Pistos fork without a lot of hours of work, why not, else, I think something like photos album is really more needed than the group feature.

And my point about federation is "we should use something common to everyone". Tent.io or something else, but not something that only Diaspora understands.

Indeed, I think we just need to take a look at how other projects have implemented these things for federation, and see if there's anything we can use.

OStatus also has groups, but I think in Diaspora* we need some more exclusive groups, too. They might not be what diaspora-users are looking for.

I was wondering if a group is (or should be) something different than an "app". We should clarify those questions before we start to push the merge-button.

I think the feature "group" or "forum" should be implemented in D*
A private or public group is very good for organizing with friends for different projects, like the university or a football team.
Please intergrate this feature ;)
regards
Tobi

Hi, I agree with matl/Tobi,

For me as an admin of pod, group functionality
is most desired one.
I can pull out many friends from Facebook or
other SNS once it gets ready.

• As Flaburgan said, photos album is also
  important of course. But I think users of Diaspora
  are "Innovators" or "Early Adopters" than
  "Late Majority" or "Laggards", for whom photo
  album is more important.

• At first, just local implementation is enough
  because we can expect people in a group
  will register mostly at the same pod.
  For example, let me create a group in my pod.
  Almost everyone I want to invite to the groupd
  will not have registered on any pod of Diaspora
  or even never heard about it.
  Of course, globally federated group function is better.
  However, having local group feature is still better than
  having no such function.
  The implementation could be upgraded later.

I like your points, they make sense. That was something had crossed my mind, actually. I wanted to put up my own pod for my own group, but lack of group feature made this pointless. I have about 300 people that need a better place than Facebook to group privately, and Diaspora would be awesome!

This would be extremely useful. Having groups makes it possible to organize and to become acquainted with people with common interests, without having to know them personally first.

I agree. Groups are very important for many of us. It is exactly this missing feature that forces many of us to use Facebook instead of Diaspora.
I would suggest that groups should be a priority if we are to 'convert' people from fb