Proposal
Add custom database columns to the local_site
and local_user
tables and corresponding config keys in the editSite
and saveUserSettings
interfaces. Data type would be text
and the column name could be user_custom
or something like that.
Rationale
Many 3rd party Lemmy UIs offer more config options than are covered by the discrete config keys currently exposed via saveUserSettings
and in the MyUserInfo
interface. A custom field where a JSON blob could be stored would allow 3rd party Lemmy UI clients to save site-level and user-level config options to the API similar to how Lemmy-UI has its settings saved.
Currently, 3PAs largely (exclusively?) utilize local storage which limits any persistence to individual devices/browsers. Adding those text
columns and exposing them via the getSite
, editSite
and saveUserSettings
interfaces would allow 3rd party apps the ability to persist settings across devices by serializing them to JSON and storing/serving from the API.
Use Cases
- Application settings and preferences
- Keyword filters
- Favorite community lists
- Community group lists
- Structured site-level data such as rules, public community groups, report and moderation templates, etc.
Possible Cons
- Would slightly increase amount of data returned in the
getSite
API call due to the extra data in thelocal_site
andmy_user
keys. - 3PA developers would have to share this field.
- Not really a concern for the Lemmy devs, but there would ultimately need to be some cooperation between 3PA devs to avoid contention (e.g. a container with namespaces, etc).
Workarounds Considered
Adding a backend server to each 3rd party UI is possible but may be overkill for the relatively common and simple task of persisting settings. A custom field exposed by the Lemmy API would alleviate that. For use-cases more advanced than simple settings storage, the 3PA dev may opt to build their own backend anyway.
In Tesseract, the current workaround is done by allowing export and import of user settings to a JSON file which can be loaded into a new device/browser. While that’s better than nothing, it’s far from ideal.
Thoughts?
Update: To test the viability of this RFC, I’ve horribly abused the theme
field to store about 60 KB of JSON user settings data. Aside from breaking the CSS in Lemmy-UI (as expected), everything works great. The additional payload data in the getSite
response doesn’t seem to be causing much of an impact. I may leave this in the next release under “advanced settings” with appropriate warnings as well as adding a “restore” button to restore it to a valid theme value. Ultimately, though, a dedicated field for 3PAs to use would be ideal.