-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 67
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Address blockers to enabling DNSlink and allowing discovery via IPFS Companion #548
Comments
Note about relative paths deployment (ipfs gateway): since fleek has deployment setup to subdomains, this will not be an issue. |
Quick brain dump before today's meeting:
Regarding "new localStorage" and losing progress history:
|
Is there a way to have Cypress simulate the experience of having IPFS Companion installed and toggling it on and off? Wondering how we’ll build tests for when DNSlink is enabled but only a subset of users are accessing the site that way. |
Apparently yes: https://www.npmjs.com/package/cypress-browser-extension-plugin |
Notes from 2020-09-11 call with @zebateira @andyschwab @lidel @hugomrdias re challenges and UX options for enabling DNSlink for ProtoSchool:
|
@lidel This is a belated response regarding the PR to add the deny list in IPFS Companion. I really appreciate your work on that and the great wording tweaks from @jessicaschilling! My notes here are probably a mix of suggestions that could potentially apply to everyone in Companion and things that are just me confirming I know where we're at. 😂 Happy to move any suggestions over to your repo if merited. My one uncomfortable gut reaction to that PR was about that I think of "manual" meaning I exerted effort to do it myself, and wouldn't expect automatic things to be under that label. Do we want to explain how something could be in your supposedly manual opt-out list when you didn't manually put it there yourself? One way to do it might be a text link under the box that says "Don't recognize one of these sites?" and if you click it, it says something longer like "Some web developers disable [insert right words] by default because certain features may be affected when accessing their site via [insert right words]. Before removing a site you use from this opt-out list, you may want to check their website for a guide to functionality differences". But shorter and with words like DNSLink or IPFS Companion or local gateway inserted as appropriate. 😂 (Sorry, still working on getting the right vocab on this one.) Also just confirming I understand the flow and options here under the new system based on the change you just merged. Is my interpretation below correct?
If I'm understanding correctly, we've arrived (from the Companion side) at Option 3, Deny List Option A from the previous comment. There's an open issue to switch to Deny List Option B, which won't affect the ProtoSchool team moving forward. And it's up to the ProtoSchool team to get us to Option 4 using by mimicking Lidel's POC. Does that sound accurate? |
Hi @terichadbourne - I can't weigh in on anything after your second paragraph, but just a note that subsequent commits in ipfs/ipfs-companion#929 got rid of the "manual" wording and explained that you can also add/remove items on those two lists by using the toggle in the browser bar menu. 😊 |
@terichadbourne thank you for this thoughtful analysis 🙏 We indeed implemented Option 3A, but instead of 3B (centralized opt-out list) we plan to let website owners to control default behavior somehow (ipfs/ipfs-companion#930) (no central list to manage, every site controls their own fate). Option 4 is up to you, but see my last note below. Overall, things are a bit simpler than what you described and I believe the gist is:
|
Some updates:
|
@lidel Wanted to check in and ask whether either the recent Brave integration or the DNSLink / TLS updates you shared today will change anything about the effects of us enabling DNSLink? |
@terichadbourne loading |
We're about to switch ProtoSchool hosting to Fleek without DNSlink enabled so that IPFS Companion doesn't discover that ProtoSchool is available on IPFS. The reasoning for this is that we have a number of unsolved issues to address before an IPFS-hosted version of the site will function properly. This issue will serve as a place to document those issues and discuss solutions before enabling DNSlink.
I'll let @zebateira add more context and then it would be great to meet with @lidel & @hugomrdias for more context to ensure we approach these challenges in the most effective manner.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: