search

the-turing-way / the-turing-way

Host repository for The Turing Way: a how to guide for reproducible data science
http://the-turing-way.org/
Other
1.92k stars 654 forks source link

Buy a dedicated domain/URL for The Turing Way #3266

Closed aleesteele closed 5 months ago

aleesteele commented 1 year ago

Summary

Ties to current expansion of infrastructure with #3213 and #3272. Below edited by @AlexandraAAJ:

Reasons to buy the Domain and level of importance:

Update, following community discussion

Following a request for community input and a subsequent discussion, a decision has been made to move forwards with a domain name change to the-turing-way.org. 🎉

Pain points: create a table

Aspect Responsible Ideas Comments
Maintenance Infrastructure WG
Budget

(between £15 - £35 per year)

Expense will be covered by The Turing Create calendar alerts to renew or buy for 5-10 years
DPAP- Risk related RPM (AAA) to check with Kit to follow Turing policies

Available Domains and prices

Domain go daddy - Cost for 1 year in Pounds - (7.9 per year for DNS) go daddy - Cost for 10 years - (7.9 per year for DNS) Name chaeap - Cost for 1 year in Pounds - (3.83 per year for DNS) Name chaeap - Cost for 10 year in Pounds - (3.83 per year for DNS) Ionos - for 1 year Not sure how to buy DNS (10 years is not allowed)
the-turing-way.org 10.16 or 22 209 5.87 97 Cost for 6 months is £1 and then £9
theturingway.org 10.16 or 23 209 5.87 97 Cost for 6 months is £1 and then £9
theturingway.io 37.99 209 35.32 353 £33
What other domains?

Domain migration timeline

Time t=0 is the purchasing of the domain.

AlexandraAAJ commented 10 months ago

Would this also affect splitting the repo's: https://github.com/the-turing-way/the-turing-way/issues/3352 and The Turing Way Knowledge Map (where we can find the info from TTW)

JimMadge commented 10 months ago

Copying some comments from Slack,

It is worth thinking about bus factor when we plan how to purchase the domain name and manage DNS. We don't want to have to require a particular person to make any changes or fix problems.

I like the idea of the Infrastructure WG being responsible. If we can find a domain registrar where we can have an organisation that would be great. Otherwise, sharing credentials :grimacing:?

The problem there is, if we are using someone's personal credit card, that exposes them a bit. Not that I think any of us would go on a domain buying spree.

JimMadge commented 10 months ago

I think there is some planning/design work, but it is all (I hope) pretty simple.

The DNS configuration should come fairly naturally (I hope). It might be nice to explain what we do/how it works that somehow in the community handbook.

AlexandraAAJ commented 9 months ago

Buy a dedicated domain/URL for The Turing Way

Update this issue: https://github.com/the-turing-way/the-turing-way/issues/3266 (remove the WIP)

Reasons to buy the Domain and level of importance:

Pain points: create a table

Aspect Responsible Ideas Comments
Maintenance Infrastructure WG
Budget

(between £15 - £35 per year)

Expense will be covered by The Turing Create calendar alerts to renew or buy for 5-10 years
DPAP- Risk related RPM (AAA) to check with Kit to follow Turing policies

Available Domains and prices

Domain go daddy - Cost for 1 year in Pounds - (7.9 per year for DNS) go daddy - Cost for 10 years - (7.9 per year for DNS) Name chaeap - Cost for 1 year in Pounds - (3.83 per year for DNS) Name chaeap - Cost for 10 year in Pounds - (3.83 per year for DNS) Ionos - for 1 year Not sure how to buy DNS (10 years is not allowed)
the-turing-way.org 10.16 or 22 209 5.87 97 Cost for 6 months is £1 and then £9
theturingway.org 10.16 or 23 209 5.87 97 Cost for 6 months is £1 and then £9
theturingway.io 37.99 209 35.32 353 £33
What other domains?
JimMadge commented 9 months ago

Thanks @AlexandraAAJ :tada:!

Some comments,

SSL (mandatory for security reasons?) - is there any cost related to this?

I think SSL is mandatory now, even for a static site. It is too easy not to use and I believe modern browsers will show warning for sites not using HTTPS.

It doesn't necessarily cost. SSL is a service as you need a trusted party to validate your certificate. However, some organisations will do that for free. If we have the choice I think we should use Let's Encrypt because of their commitments to freedom/openness. That said, we should also consider donating and encouraging donations.

Exactly how SSL works will probably depend on how we host. I think hosting providers often take care of it for you.

Proposed planning stages and domain structure, open for discussion: (domain name could be different, depending on the URL to buy)

I would suggest using subdomains rather than paths for different things. For example,

It is easier to manage that way. (At least, that's how I've always done it :smile:).

(3.83 per year for DNS)

Is this "premium" DNS? I would expect any domain registrar would include DNS in the price (otherwise, what is the point of buying the domain name). I do think I've seem NameCheap selling premium DNS though. I'm not really sure what the difference is, but maybe if your site has high traffic it helps.

aleesteele commented 9 months ago

Community voting process

Adding notes here posted on slack about gathering community input about the name shift. This is drawing from frameworks for consensus for large groups.

Slack: I (or anyone in the WG!) can post in the #ask-away channel with a global tag, using emoji reactions to vote. The vote can be a collective infrastructure working group proposal, with three options of 1) No issue, 2) Different preference but go ahead and 3) Disagree, and commitment to comment. Adding draft language here now. Comments will be cross-posted to this issue. Collaboration Cafe: I can reserve the next 'main room' discussion in the Collab Cafe so that folks can join in/discuss the names in real time. The next one is next week on 7 February. Notes can be used for reporting can be added to this issue as well. Newsletter: Flag that voting is happening, linking outwards. Say that it closes on 14 Feb. Social media: Voting is not happening directly on those platforms, but can link people to appropriate channels if they want to engage similarly with deadline. Community call: Votes and comments are compiled and then presented at Community Call, with confirmation of URL name.

How does that sound?

I would suggest that we set the deadline for choosing this URL as finalised on 15 February at the community call.

Also adding some notes about the decision tree here: https://github.com/orgs/the-turing-way/projects/3/views/3?filterQuery=decision&pane=issue&itemId=50856916

gedankenstuecke commented 9 months ago

Just as I see an .io domain suggested in the tables above: I would strongly suggest not going with io, due to the controversies in relationship to British colonialism: wikipedia has some info, also c.f. this article from the guardian in 2022

JimMadge commented 9 months ago

Good point @gedankenstuecke. I always assumed it was one of the newer, generic TLDs.

I imagine a lot of orgs and people have bought .io domains without knowing.

Not certain if the plan is to have a final vote on the domain name itself. Can we say here we won't put any .io domains on the short list?

edit In fact, not using any country code TLD (.gg, .tv, etc.) seems like a sensible move.

gedankenstuecke commented 9 months ago

Oh yeah, totally agree on most orgs/people not knowing that it's a "country" TLD (and even if, they might not have known about the history)! But as it's been a recurring topic in different places I thought it would be good to sidestep it!

da5nsy commented 9 months ago

Following on from today's @the-turing-way/infrastructure working group meeting (TODO add link to notes) I'm writing this comment to provide the central place to which we can link on Slack and social media.

Proposal: The @the-turing-way/infrastructure working group proposes that we start using the domain name the-turing-way.org (replacing the-turing-way.netlify.app).

See the top comment on this issue for the rationale behind this proposal.

We're opening this up for community input, but to avoid a boatymcboatface situation (turing-mcway-face anyone?), and to avoid drowning discussion in "LGTM!" comments, we'd like to ask that responses be structured as emoji reactions to this comment:

If you would like to comment anonymously, please reach out to @aleesteele ("Anne Lee Steele" on Slack).

The goal is to have a final decision in time for the Community Call on Feb 15th.

KirstieJane commented 9 months ago

Thank you so much to all the working group for thinking this through so well! 💖

llewelld commented 9 months ago

Just to check I'm understanding correctly (I did read through and I think this is made clear, but I wasn't 100% certain) the proposal includes that all requests to the current the-turing-way.netlify.app domain will be redirected to the new domain, so no existing inward links will be broken?

JimMadge commented 9 months ago

Just to check I'm understanding correctly (I did read through and I think this is made clear, but I wasn't 100% certain) the proposal includes that all requests to the current the-turing-way.netlify.app domain will be redirected to the new domain, so no existing inward links will be broken?

That is a good question @llewelld. I'm actually not sure how easy that is to do. Could we have no HTML on Netlify and just redirects, for example?

I think I was expecting to have a clean break here so that we would have the-turing-way.org as the only URL from now on. Some short-term pain for lower maintenance burden.

gedankenstuecke commented 9 months ago

I guess in the short-term there's no moving away from netlify, so the "new" URLs and old URLs would work side-by-side. If there's a migration away from netlify it seems that it's possible to create redirect rules: https://docs.netlify.com/routing/redirects/

So it would be possible to ensure that the old netlify URLs still work/point to the right sources!

penyuan commented 9 months ago

Thank you everyone for this enormous and inclusive effort!!

I agree with @llewelld point about new vs old URLs, and in my opinion, handling and minimising link rot is a problem that's very much related to good open research.

I suppose another possible solution is to perpetually keep one super simple page at the old https://the-turing-way.netlify.app/ that contains just one link which says "Click here to go to the new site!" Would this work?

llewelld commented 9 months ago

Thanks for clarifying @JimMadge, @gedankenstuecke. Nice that netify supports redirects. Some 301 redirect rules, as early as possible before netify is retired, would be the ideal solution in my view. But I'm on the fringe here and not having to do any of the work, so just checking before applying my thumbs emoji!

gedankenstuecke commented 9 months ago

Right, I think as soon as the domain would be there the new 'canonical' URLs would be the ones using the own TLD, but with the netlify ones being redirected to that TLD (even if strictly speaking still being located at those netlify URLs), c.f. how github pages handles it, as soon as you have your own TLD connected to it everything is being redirected to that TLD.

npch commented 9 months ago

I support the proposed move to the-turing-way.org provided that the current netlify domain is run in parallel with redirects in place for long enough that archives (e.g. Internet Archive) can crawl and archive the redirections to the new domain.

JimMadge commented 9 months ago

Thanks @gedankenstuecke @llewelld :tada::pray:.

Redirects with 301 look like the right way to go.

I'm not super keen on deploying the book to two places for an extended period of time (I don't think anyone is suggesting that). I don't see why we shouldn't leave the redirects and perhaps a "we have moved" page like @penyuan suggested. Especially as we can have permanent redirects and wildcards.

What tempts me to take a harder line is, we don't own netlify.app so we can loose the-turing-way.netflify.app and that would be out of our control. the-turing-way.org can survive backend migrations indefinitely. So, I would like to "push" people to the canonical URL.

gedankenstuecke commented 9 months ago

right, I think we're saying the same thing @JimMadge , but just to double check:

  1. The plan is doing a 301 to the own domain asap after getting the domain, even if still deployed on netlify.
  2. Then, if we ever migrate elsewhere we make sure that the old netlify URLs continue as redirects to the new home?
JimMadge commented 9 months ago

right, I think we're saying the same thing @JimMadge , but just to double check:

  1. The plan is doing a 301 to the own domain asap after getting the domain, even if still deployed on netlify.

  2. Then, if we ever migrate elsewhere we make sure that the old netlify URLs continue as redirects to the new home?

  1. I not exactly sure about that level of detail right now. If we bring our own domain to Netlify, are we still able to create redirects for the-turing-way.netlify.app?

The docs suggest it is possible.

The Netlify subdomain URLs will always work even if you set up a custom domain for your site.

So, I think this is the most sensible thing to do :+1:, both for the infra team and readers.

  1. Absolutely :+1:.

I think we agree in the broad strokes, but I'm not certain about the mechanism yet. And I think the feedback I'm getting here is that keeping the existing URL(s) working for as long as possible (at least the foreseeable future) is important.

sgibson91 commented 9 months ago

provided that the current netlify domain is run in parallel with redirects in place for long enough that archives (e.g. Internet Archive) can crawl and archive the redirections to the new domain.

@npch do you have any estimation on how long 'long enough' is?

chartgerink commented 9 months ago

@sgibson91 6-12 months I would suspect is sufficient for the crawlers. I would suggest leaving the redirect in place to ensure the links from blogs, articles, etc stay alive if it's not a cost factor.

Overall it's good that this change is happening and gave it my thumbs up 👍

[!NOTE] One consideration we usually make at @libscie is that dashes or hard to spell elements increase likelihood of ending up on the wrong URL. the-turing-way.org may have a risk of misspelling. I can recommend going for theturingway.org or turingway.org if there is no hard brand identification with the dashes.

penyuan commented 9 months ago

Oh, by the way, could we update the current site with an announcement (perhaps on the first page) that a major domain change is coning, and that the URL will be changing soon? There are two advantages:

  1. Visitors coming now will see the announcement that a change is coming.
  2. We can then archive the frontpage (along with the announcement) in places like the Internet Archive and others. This way, future generations can at least see the announcement in that archive that the URL has changed.
RaphaelS1 commented 9 months ago

Hi all, I was chatting with @aleesteele and had a quick accessibility question about the-turing-way.org vs theturingway.org, which I'm also cross-posting to the accessibility Slack. Is it more accessible to have the URL with hyphens which is easier to read but more error prone (and slightly less standard in URLs) or URL without hyphens which is harder to read? Would there also be an associated Turing Way email, like [at]the-turing-way.com (which would be harder to type than [at]theturingway.com)?

I was looking into this when making my own website recently and decided against hyphens as general consensus seemed to be that hyphens are good in subdirectories but not preferable in second-level domain as they make the URL less memorable (because non-standard), possibly more likely to be targeted by people squatting on similar domains (e.g., theturing-way or the-turingway) though this argument goes both ways (e.g., theturlngway.org), and more associated with spammy content (though unsure how valid this is as an argument)

KirstieJane commented 9 months ago

Important question on accessibility @RaphaelS1 - thank you for raising it.

One point to emphasise wrt to the suggestion of having hyphens is that we have hyphens now so it becomes less of a change for the url. If we wanted to get rid of the hyphens we would arguably have to change the github repo and organisation name!

Personally I like the readability of the hyphens and I also don't think anyone remembers urls anymore anyway - I think folks will always find us through an external link or a search engine... but happy to be told I'm in the minority in that perspective!

I agree the squatting problem goes both ways - I don't think we're popular enough to have lots of people aiming to spoof us.... but open to best practices on how to avoid it!

RaphaelS1 commented 9 months ago

Makes sense @KirstieJane, I think it's also mainly just a headache when there's an associated email !

JimMadge commented 9 months ago

I don't think there is an infrastructure reason for choosing dashes or no dashes over the other. I think the infrastructure team are happy to be given a steer if there is a strong accessibility or branding reason to prefer one.

I think we definitely should have mailboxes at the-turing-way.org for much the same reasons as moving the domain.

da5nsy commented 9 months ago

@KirstieJane

If we wanted to get rid of the hyphens we would arguably have to change the github repo and organisation name

Just adding the info here that both of these changes are technically possible and it seems like they would be minimally disruptive (github would handle redirects)

RaphaelS1 commented 9 months ago

Very happy to be told this is just a me problem but for mailboxes I personally struggle with hyphens, which I frequently forget and don't notice my mistake (e.g., I wouldn't notice the mistake in "hello@the-turingway.org"). Though I guess @KirstieJane comment still applies if we're not expecting people to remember the mailbox but to click on a 'contact us' or similar link from the website.

KirstieJane commented 9 months ago

Very happy to be told this is just a me problem but for mailboxes I personally struggle with hyphens, which I frequently forget and don't notice my mistake (e.g., I wouldn't notice the mistake in "hello@the-turingway.org"). Though I guess @KirstieJane comment still applies if we're not expecting people to remember the mailbox but to click on a 'contact us' or similar link from the website.

Definitely agree about hyphens in email addresses. I guess I like them for URLs but not for emails and I don't feel strongly that they need to be harmonised (which might actually be the personal preference that's the difference between you and me @RaphaelS1!)

KirstieJane commented 9 months ago

I don't think there is an infrastructure reason for choosing dashes or no dashes over the other. I think the infrastructure team are happy to be given a steer if there is a strong accessibility or branding reason to prefer one.

I think we definitely should have mailboxes at the-turing-way.org for much the same reasons as moving the domain.

Do we need mailboxes at that url? We have a gmail email address and a turing institute address. Why do we need mailboxes that align with the domain url? What problem does that solve?

KirstieJane commented 9 months ago

@sgibson91 6-12 months I would suspect is sufficient for the crawlers. I would suggest leaving the redirect in place to ensure the links from blogs, articles, etc stay alive if it's not a cost factor.

Overall it's good that this change is happening and gave it my thumbs up 👍

Note

One consideration we usually make at @libscie is that dashes or hard to spell elements increase likelihood of ending up on the wrong URL. the-turing-way.org may have a risk of misspelling. I can recommend going for theturingway.org or turingway.org if there is no hard brand identification with the dashes.

Thank you @chartgerink ! 🙏

KirstieJane commented 9 months ago

Oh, by the way, could we update the current site with an announcement (perhaps on the first page) that a major domain change is coning, and that the URL will be changing soon? There are two advantages:

1. Visitors coming now will see the announcement that a change is coming.

2. We can then archive the frontpage (along with the announcement) in places like the [Internet Archive](https://www.archive.org/) and others. This way, future generations can at least see the announcement in that archive that the URL has changed.

I think this is an important part of documenting the process - Can I ask the infrastructure working group to document a proposed the timeline incorporating these announcements and redirects? OR let me know if you'd like input from me / @malvikasharan / @aleesteele on the comms plan ✨

aleesteele commented 9 months ago

Adding this excellent note from @trallard here from Slack (with her permission!). She makes a great point: "The advantage of the hyphenated approach is that it is a lot more readable theturingway is definitely harder/takes longer to parse than the-turing-way. Readability is important to consider especially for cognitive disabilities inclusion"

JimMadge commented 9 months ago

Do we need mailboxes at that url? We have a gmail email address and a turing institute address. Why do we need mailboxes that align with the domain url? What problem does that solve?

Not a need. However, I can see similar arguments to having a canonical domain. If we decide to move email hosting from Gmail or The Turing, the addresses will not change.

(I also vainly think, if we've bought a domain, why not? We get it for free)

Should also check if it would mean,

JimMadge commented 9 months ago

I think this is an important part of documenting the process - Can I ask the infrastructure working group to document a proposed the timeline incorporating these announcements and redirects? OR let me know if you'd like input from me / @malvikasharan / @aleesteele on the comms plan ✨

:100:. It feels like it would help to have one timeline to coordinate everything. Maybe we can write it in relative time,

Should I have a go at writing something like that (and adding it to the top comment here)? Input on the comms would be very helpful :pray:.

malvikasharan commented 9 months ago

That sounds good to me. Thank you, Jim. I can integrate some comms plan in there which might just mean that we are announcing first in Slack and Newsletter and then deactivating the older URL as you proposed.

The comms plan should have:

JimMadge commented 9 months ago

@aleesteele @AlexandraAAJ @malvikasharan I've added a timeline to the top-level comment.

Does that seem reasonable to you for coordinating comms with the domain migration? I don't think the infra team will need to control the comms, but we can of course help with getting the messaging about the technical parts right.

aleesteele commented 8 months ago

@JimMadge - thanks for preparing this! Love the notation! I've translated it into a (perhaps more traditional) communications plan, to get specific dates down for communicating with the wider community? My larger recommendation would be to stretch out the timelines, as things always take much longer than predicted :)

This is assuming that this timeline starts with the infrastructure meeting next week, and that this migration kicks off in March:

Communication Activity Target Audience Who is involved & role Timeline Notes Status
Preparation & planning Infrastructure WG ALS & AAA Aug 2023 - March 2024 Preparation and needs analysis for TTW url ✅
First announcement on Slack for community vote Wider community (soft launch on Slack) @da5nsy posted on Slack ✅
Newsletter Wider community/lurkers ALS + AAA January Newsletter ✅
Newsletter Wider community/lurkers ALS + AAA February Newsletter ✅
Second announcement on Slack for community about timeline & upcoming domain change Wider community (soft launch on Slack) Infrastructure WG member posting reminder on Slack? 7 March ✅
Website announcement banner on book Wider community/lurkers/users Infrastructure WG + ALS X DATE IN MARCH ✅
Social media announcement (Linkedin, Twitter, Mastodon) Wider community/lurkers/users Infrastructure WG + ALS X DATE IN MARCH ✅
Newsletter Wider community/lurkers ALS + AAA March Newsletter ✅
JimMadge commented 8 months ago

Thanks @aleesteele :pray: :rocket:

This is assuming that this timeline starts with the infrastructure meeting next week, and that this migration kicks off in March

Let's do that then. The conversation has gone quiet, with 25 approves, 1 "don't mind" and 0 disapproves. I think we can go ahead with the-turing-way.org. I'm not sure if @AlexandraAAJ has figured out a way to purchase the domain. I'll use my credit card if that's what we need to get it done :+1:.

AlexandraAAJ commented 8 months ago

Thanks @aleesteele and @JimMadge. Jim, let me confirm you next Tuesday if we can proceed this way.

KirstieJane commented 8 months ago

Hi folks! I'll pay on my credit card for this year.

I'm struggling to see the final decision on the vote - could someone update the top level of this issue so that we have an easy to read historical record please? You can us the top level to link to specific comments rather than copying text.

KirstieJane commented 8 months ago

On a different note - I think the timeline is too ambitious but I could be convinced otherwise.

da5nsy commented 8 months ago

I'm struggling to see the final decision on the vote - could someone update the top level of this issue so that we have an easy to read historical record please? You can us the top level to link to specific comments rather than copying text.

I've updated the top level text 👍

malvikasharan commented 8 months ago

25 people have upvoted for the-turing-way.org domain, with no disagreement.

My suggestion would be to reserve the domain for 5-10 years https://www.namecheap.com/domains/registration/results/?domain=the-turing-way.

KirstieJane commented 8 months ago

Thank you so much @da5nsy!

Domain purchased for 10 years!! 🚀 🌟

EXCITING!

AlexandraAAJ commented 8 months ago

Adding here this to review with the community: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Btjl1ryDlAwrAiRSVkbWTUORujPGUaQfhF8To9XtNKo/edit#heading=h.kehfirdlwxmb

Should this be a new issue?

JimMadge commented 7 months ago

Having a look at redirects, I don't think we can redirect the-turing-way.netlify.app to book.the-turing-way.org while we are still hosting on Netlify. Because book.the-turing-way.org has a CNAME rule pointing at the-turing-way.netlify.app I think it would be a circular redirect?

What we might have to do is prepare the redirects, then deploy a minimal Netlify site with a simple HTML file and the redirects to book.the-turing-way.org.

@sgibson91 does that sound right to you? Honestly not sure what happens when an HTTP redirect clashes with a CNAME rule 😱. Related to #3577.

sgibson91 commented 7 months ago

@JimMadge Yeah, your reasoning and proposed path sound right