That looks like a honest thing to skip over I’ve definitely done that before. They never said they ship oauth so it’s fair game I think
Replies
I didn’t know they said they weren’t going to ship oauth 👀 Mostly just excited about this cause you can have private preferences somewhat on protocol with it
sep 2, 2025, 9:41 pm • 3 0 • view
Ah I understood it differently. That it is a Bsky only feature right now
sep 2, 2025, 9:47 pm • 1 0 • view
I think no longer with this change that came in on 8/12 it looks like. It doesn’t store the pref in your PDS but if you change the atproto proxy to a did:web for an XRPC appview your PDS will proxy that to it instead with a jwt and can store it privately for your atproto app (from what I’m seeing)
sep 2, 2025, 9:52 pm • 3 0 • view
Interested to see how that might work.
sep 3, 2025, 5:16 am • 2 0 • view
This was fixed to work like it always was meant to. Storing the preferences on the PDS was actually a "hack" we put in place to avoid storing user data in *our* appview. Because of that hack, third party appviews were not able to receive pref calls. This is what this change is about.
sep 3, 2025, 6:14 am • 8 0 • view
Appreciate the change! Was excited to find it yesterday.
sep 3, 2025, 1:08 pm • 1 0 • view
for what it's worth i'm able to `getPreferences` just fine, but I get HTTP 500 for `app.bsky.actor.putPreferences` proxied to my backend(/appview claiming to be a #bsky_appview) via mushroom pds. (no request reaches my backend)
sep 3, 2025, 7:38 pm • 2 0 • view
wrangled most of the bits (minus token `aud#with_fragement` inconsistency) into a bug report: github.com/bluesky-soci...
sep 9, 2025, 8:24 pm • 2 0 • view
See this thread on the latest I’ve seen bsky.app/profile/matt...
sep 2, 2025, 9:45 pm • 0 0 • view