search

galetahub / ckeditor

Ckeditor 4.x integration gem for rails
https://ckeditor.com/ckeditor-4/
MIT License
2.23k stars 878 forks source link

CKEditor CDN is not an option in certain environments #879

Closed itay-grudev closed 4 years ago

itay-grudev commented 4 years ago

CKEditor CDN is not an option in environments which closely observe GDPR and cannot allow personal information leakage to external servers.

A request to external CDN would disclose the user's IP address, which according to GDPR is considered personally identifiable information.

For this reason, please restore the functionality of this gem where the CKEditor JavaScript was bundled and distributed with Sprockets.

patricklindsay commented 4 years ago

Check out 4.3.0 if you're looking for this functionality. The only major thing you'll be losing is the Active Storage adapter.

https://github.com/galetahub/ckeditor/tree/v4.3.0

I'm still using this version as I'm overriding a couple plugins which isn't possible with the CDN.

itay-grudev commented 4 years ago

@patrickdavey That's what I've been doing. I used the latest version before the project switched to CDN only. But still this isn't a solution to the problem, but a workaround that will just get old over time.

arufanov commented 4 years ago

+1 for "please restore the functionality of this gem where the CKEditor JavaScript was bundled and distributed with Sprockets". thanks!

oklas commented 4 years ago

Using 4.3.0 is impossible due to at least #757

patricklindsay commented 4 years ago

I'm using 4.3.0 in production with no issues. That issue was reported for v4.2.3, I've reopened it for more information incase anyone is still experiencing it.

Although initially I wasn't a fan of dropping the assets, I now think it's the right path. Rather than providing Ckeditor assets the gem should only be responsible for integrating Rails and Ckeditor - i.e. providing some basic configuration, file storage adapter, form wrappers and a file manager.

Given that Rails now comes bundled with Webpacker it should be pretty straight forward to include it - although granted we should support this and include it in the docs.

I can take a look at this, @galetahub what do you think?

itay-grudev commented 4 years ago

If you offer an easy way to get it back through webpacker - no complaints there. It's a reasonable method.

stale[bot] commented 4 years ago

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.