Closed HonkingGoose closed 2 weeks ago
@gr2m can you post a comment on this issue, so I can assign it to you? Seeing as you're doing the first step of contacting someone internally at GitHub.
I can only assign people that have commented on the issue, or are part of the Renovate team. So that's why I need you to comment. :upside_down_face:
sure 👋
Can you explain why something like togithub.com is even needed? Why not just link directly to the correct github.com link?
Direct links cause "backlink spam". The worst is when release notes include a username. That person could wake up to hundreds or thousands of GitHub notifications. But even merged PRs could get pages of annoying back links from every public repository which gets an upgrade PR referencing it
I'll assign both of you to the issue, because we need @gr2m
for the making-contact-phase, and @rarkins
later for the transfer.
The worst is when release notes include a username. That person could wake up to hundreds or thousands of GitHub notifications
I don't think that happens if you escape them, which I think you already do? @gr2m
-> [@gr2m](https://github.com/gr2m)
(example). I just tried if the same works with links to avoid backlinks, but that didn't work. It seems not to matter what is used as label, the backlink shows up if the link is a valid issue URL
I only know the togithub.com redirect URLs from the package link, like here: https://github.com/semantic-release/semantic-release/pull/3326, where it just links to the repository
This could be linked directly to the repository, right?
From what you are saying is that you replace all github.com
links with the togithub.com
domain?
We replace all to be careful. Otherwise you can't escape them enough without breaking the links
We also don't want the task of playing "catch up" every time there's some new way we discover to accidentally backlink and someone gets spammed for a while. This approach has been successful for years now!
The problem is notification and backlink spam, right? Using togithub.com is a solution to that, but maybe there is something else that GitHub can do. I'll think about it and see if I find folks within GitHub to talk about it
That's exactly right
The problem is notification and backlink spam, right? Using togithub.com is a solution to that, but maybe there is something else that GitHub can do.
What if as GitHub app creator you could select a backlink mode?
By default, GitHub would not show backlinks, to prevent bot/app creators from accidentally spamming a repository/users with links. The new default would be a breaking change compared to the current default behavior!
Currently GitHub will link back for every reference to an Issue or PR.
If you do want the app/bot to backlink to Issues, PRs, you can opt-in with a special toggle. This toggle should have clear text explaining the behavior you'll get, and ask again if you're sure! Like how GitHub asks you to be really sure and confirm again for "potentially dangerous/difficult to revert actions" like transferring repo ownership, making a private repo public and so on.
If GitHub wants to keep the current behavior as default, that's fine also. The main thing is to give app/bot creators a choice. And to give creators peace of mind they're not accidentally spamming users.
This kinda thing about connecting to Github really stress me out
@oliviertassinari
said: ^1
Dependabot uses
redirect.github.com
maybe a better option.
I'll let the maintainers decide which is best:
togithub.com
domain to GitHub, ortogithub.com
domain, and use official redirect.github.com
If we decide to use the official redirect domain, we probably should ask for permission from GitHub first? That's because Renovate creates a lot of redirect links, and has a lot of users.
We should use redirect.github.com
@HonkingGoose maybe let's open a new issue and supersede/close this one
Describe the proposed change(s).
Renovate's
togithub.com
redirect domain got blocked by GitHub's Umbrella protection system. This block is now reverted, so the redirect works properly again. But maybe having the domain controlled by GitHub officially is better.@rarkins
said:@gr2m
offered to contact somebody from GitHub about transferring the domain to GitHub, and will ping us when they hear something.Related discussion:
27568