Groups are pretty much just meta-profiles that are !mentioned instead of @mentioned. They exist on one instance, have a profile with all posts made to them viewable, and then parrot those posts out to everyone who follows the group. You can see one here and even remote join it as a Mastodon user https://gnusocial.no/group/fediverse though I have no idea how Mastodon presents this visually.
Groups in GS are either Public or Private. No granularity. Set by the admin of the group.
As for ActivityPub, that is actually the protocol that superseded OStatus, and GS just never got with the program. Anything using OStatus is encouraged to jump to AP. This is part of why I see a protocol split coming. GS's development cycle is glacial at this point while Mastodon wants to start dipping a toe into AP in the next point release. By "Dipping a toe in" I mean I think the plan is to use AP for follower-only posts and direct messages, and OStatus for everything else for now?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 30 Jun 2017 07:38 (UTC)Groups in GS are either Public or Private. No granularity. Set by the admin of the group.
As for ActivityPub, that is actually the protocol that superseded OStatus, and GS just never got with the program. Anything using OStatus is encouraged to jump to AP. This is part of why I see a protocol split coming. GS's development cycle is glacial at this point while Mastodon wants to start dipping a toe into AP in the next point release. By "Dipping a toe in" I mean I think the plan is to use AP for follower-only posts and direct messages, and OStatus for everything else for now?
I don't think even the devs know for sure yet.