privacyguides
/
privacytools.io
Archived
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 304 Pull Requests 47 Activity

clarify PULL_REQUST_TEMPLATE.md & CONTRIBUTING.md #1291

Merged
Mikaela merged 8 commits from pr-template into master 2019-09-23 20:50:52 +00:00
Conversation 12 Commits 8 Files Changed 2 +13 -12
Mikaela commented 2019-09-10 19:42:58 +00:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link
No description provided.
privacytoolsIO (Migrated from github.com) reviewed 2019-09-10 19:42:58 +00:00
netlify[bot] commented 2019-09-10 19:43:51 +00:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

Deploy preview for privacytools-io ready!

Built with commit ddeacef5ba70c463433973fcd8e1516a455d0918

https://deploy-preview-1291--privacytools-io.netlify.com

Deploy preview for *privacytools-io* ready! Built with commit ddeacef5ba70c463433973fcd8e1516a455d0918 https://deploy-preview-1291--privacytools-io.netlify.com
netlify[bot] commented 2019-09-10 19:44:22 +00:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

Deploy preview for privacytools-io ready!

Built with commit 33933f2f8b

https://deploy-preview-1291--privacytools-io.netlify.com

Deploy preview for *privacytools-io* ready! Built with commit 33933f2f8b550e613e284388417a4a22cff8d132 https://deploy-preview-1291--privacytools-io.netlify.com
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) reviewed 2019-09-10 19:46:45 +00:00
.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
@ -1,19 +1,17 @@
<!-- PLEASE READ OUR CONTRIBUTING GUIDELINES (https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md) BEFORE SUBMITTING -->
<!-- PLEASE READ OUR CODE OF CONDUCT (https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md) AND CONTRIBUTING GUIDELINES (https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md) BEFORE SUBMITTING -->
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-10 19:43:58 +00:00

First hint that we do want the discussion issue to exist.

First hint that we do want the discussion issue to exist.
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-10 19:44:47 +00:00

I may want to check that wiki page and if there is a better one.

I may want to check that wiki page and if there is a better one.
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-10 19:45:51 +00:00 
- [ ] The project has an associated discussion: # <!-- issue number -->

oops. Anyway the previous formatting was very unhelpful in my opinion as it just went to issue page and forced me to use search as no one (me included) never changed the link.

and I think The fits here better than This, even if there is probably no practical difference.

```suggestion - [ ] The project has an associated discussion: # <!-- issue number --> ``` oops. Anyway the previous formatting was very unhelpful in my opinion as it just went to issue page and forced me to use search as no one (me included) never changed the link. and I think `The` fits here better than `This`, even if there is probably no practical difference.
.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
@ -2,3 +1,4 @@
<!-- PLEASE READ OUR CODE OF CONDUCT (https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md) AND CONTRIBUTING GUIDELINES (https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md) BEFORE SUBMITTING -->
## Description
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-10 19:46:39 +00:00

Oh and I wonder if we should also mention CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md on the top, but if we get a project that is full of hate, I guess we can refer to it separately.

Oh and I wonder if we should also mention CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md on the top, but if we get a project that is full of hate, I guess we can refer to it separately.
.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
@ -15,3 +13,3 @@
- [ ] This project has an [associated discussion](https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/issues).
- [ ] The project is [Free Libre](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software) and/or [Open Source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software) Software
* Netlify preview for the mainly edited page: <!-- link or Non Applicable? Edit this in afterwards -->
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-10 19:44:25 +00:00

I think this is more clear formatting.

I think this is more clear formatting.
.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-10 19:46:07 +00:00

We recently had a PR that listed the fork here.

We recently had a PR that listed the fork here.
Mikaela commented 2019-09-10 20:00:14 +00:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

Open source and free software are very overlapping, but open source is more inclusive and I think it's what we actually care about here instead of free software movement.

Example case: I remembered @blacklight447-ptio and @dawidpotocki discussing VeraCrypt recently as VeraCrypt is not free software, but is open source software.

Open source and free software are very overlapping, but open source is more inclusive and I think it's what we actually care about here instead of free software movement. Example case: I remembered @blacklight447-ptio and @dawidpotocki discussing VeraCrypt recently as VeraCrypt is not free software, but is open source software. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VeraCrypt#License_and_source_model
dawidpotocki commented 2019-09-10 21:50:23 +00:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

I was discussing that TrueCrypt (from which VeraCrypt is forked) IS NOT Open Source.

but VeraCrypt inherited a substantial amount of code from its predecessor TrueCrypt, and also inherited the source-available TrueCrypt License for those files.

It's not Open Source. Please read definition at https://opensource.org/osd and then read TrueCrypt license. For bonus points you can also read Free Software definition at https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html.

You may make copies of This Product
(unmodified) and distribute copies of This Product (unmodified)
that are not included in another product forming Your Product
(except as permitted under Chapter III).

First thing in license and it already makes it not open source

Discussion of the licensing terms on the Open Source Initiative (OSI)'s license-discuss mailing list in October 2013 suggests that the TrueCrypt License has made progress towards compliance with the Open Source Definition but would not yet pass if proposed for certification as Open Source software.

According to current OSI president Simon Phipps:

...it is not at all appropriate for [TrueCrypt] to describe itself as "open source." This use of the term "open source" to describe something under a license that's not only unapproved by OSI but known to be subject to issues is unacceptable.

From https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrueCrypt

I was discussing that TrueCrypt (from which VeraCrypt is forked) IS NOT Open Source. > but VeraCrypt inherited a substantial amount of code from its predecessor TrueCrypt, and also inherited the __source-available__ TrueCrypt License for those files. It's not Open Source. Please read definition at https://opensource.org/osd and then read TrueCrypt license. For bonus points you can also read Free Software definition at https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html. > You may make copies of This Product (unmodified) and distribute copies of This Product (unmodified) that are not included in another product forming Your Product (except as permitted under Chapter III). First thing in license and it already makes it not open source > Discussion of the licensing terms on the Open Source Initiative (OSI)'s license-discuss mailing list in October 2013 suggests that the TrueCrypt License has made progress towards compliance with the Open Source Definition but would not yet pass if proposed for certification as Open Source software. According to current OSI president Simon Phipps: > ...it is not at all appropriate for [TrueCrypt] to describe itself as "open source." This use of the term "open source" to describe something under a license that's not only unapproved by OSI but known to be subject to issues is unacceptable. From https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrueCrypt
Mikaela commented 2019-09-10 22:18:00 +00:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

Do I understand correctly that that leaves two choices where to go with this PR?

  • Require source to be available (and where to link to explain it)?
  • Mentally note that "open source" is not a trademark and ignore OSI's preference as long as we won't start calling things "OSI certified"?

The term "open source" was originally intended to be trademarkable; however, the term was deemed too descriptive, so no trademark exists.[80] The OSI would prefer that people treat open source as if it were a trademark, and use it only to describe software licensed under an OSI approved license.[81]
OSI Certified is a trademark licensed only to people who are distributing software licensed under a license listed on the Open Source Initiative's list.[82]

And what do you think of the PR itself?

Do I understand correctly that that leaves two choices where to go with this PR? * Require source to be available (and where to link to explain it)? * Mentally note that "open source" is not a trademark and ignore OSI's preference as long as we won't start calling things "OSI certified"? > The term "open source" was originally intended to be trademarkable; however, the term was deemed too descriptive, so no trademark exists.[80] The OSI would prefer that people treat open source as if it were a trademark, and use it only to describe software licensed under an OSI approved license.[81] > OSI Certified is a trademark licensed only to people who are distributing software licensed under a license listed on the Open Source Initiative's list.[82] * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software#Free_software * * * * * And what do you think of the PR itself?
Mikaela commented 2019-09-10 22:19:12 +00:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

Wait, is the case of VeraCrypt even relevant to this PR other than my comment being incorrect in case of OSIs preference being heard? Is it just free software vs open source software? How about Free Libre Open Source Software?

Wait, is the case of VeraCrypt even relevant to this PR other than my comment being incorrect in case of OSIs preference being heard? Is it just free software vs open source software? How about Free Libre Open Source Software?
blacklight447 commented 2019-09-10 22:52:11 +00:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

Tbh, if you can read the source code, I call it open source, no matter what license.

Tbh, if you can read the source code, I call it open source, no matter what license.
👀 1 ❤️ 1
ghbjklhv1 (Migrated from github.com) requested changes 2019-09-10 22:57:22 +00:00
ghbjklhv1 (Migrated from github.com) left a comment

I think everybody at this point in time knows what free/libre software is.

Perhaps replace free software with [free](https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html)/[libre software](https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libre_software) to create:

free/libre software

Another common term is FLOSS but I personally prefer the term "free/libre".

I think everybody at this point in time knows what free/libre software is. _________________ Perhaps replace `free software` with `[free](https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html)/[libre software](https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libre_software)` to create: > [free](https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html)/[libre software](https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libre_software) Another common term is [FLOSS](https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLOSS) but I personally prefer the term "free/libre".
ghbjklhv1 commented 2019-09-10 23:01:18 +00:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

Open source and free software are very overlapping, but open source is more inclusive and I think it's what we actually care about here instead of free software movement.

I mostly agree with @blacklight447-ptio that open-source is too broad and doesn't get to the point of being able to read the software and remix the software.

> Open source and free software are very overlapping, but open source is more inclusive and I think it's what we actually care about here instead of free software movement. I _mostly_ agree with [@blacklight447-ptio](https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/pull/1291#issuecomment-530150637) that open-source is too broad and doesn't get to the point of being able to read the software and remix the software.
nitrohorse (Migrated from github.com) requested changes 2019-09-11 02:34:36 +00:00
nitrohorse (Migrated from github.com) left a comment

Some suggestions 👍

Some suggestions :+1:
.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
@ -1,19 +1,17 @@
<!-- PLEASE READ OUR CONTRIBUTING GUIDELINES (https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md) BEFORE SUBMITTING -->
<!-- PLEASE READ OUR CODE OF CONDUCT (https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md) AND CONTRIBUTING GUIDELINES (https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md) BEFORE SUBMITTING -->
nitrohorse (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-11 02:32:39 +00:00

I would probably tidy this up a bit to:

<!-- A link to the discussion issue(s) resolved by this pull request. If there is none, feel free to delete this line. -->
I would probably tidy this up a bit to: ``` <!-- A link to the discussion issue(s) resolved by this pull request. If there is none, feel free to delete this line. --> ```
nitrohorse (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-11 02:34:12 +00:00

Is this somewhat redundant due to already having a "Resolves"? Could we remove this line in favor of having the "Resolves"?

Is this somewhat redundant due to already having a "Resolves"? Could we remove this line in favor of having the "Resolves"?
.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
@ -2,3 +1,4 @@
<!-- PLEASE READ OUR CODE OF CONDUCT (https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md) AND CONTRIBUTING GUIDELINES (https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md) BEFORE SUBMITTING -->
## Description
nitrohorse (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-11 02:31:06 +00:00

Hmm, I'm not sure but it doesn't hurt to add it as a comment at the top as a reminder.

Hmm, I'm not sure but it doesn't hurt to add it as a comment at the top as a reminder.
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) reviewed 2019-09-11 07:56:05 +00:00
.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
@ -1,19 +1,17 @@
<!-- PLEASE READ OUR CONTRIBUTING GUIDELINES (https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md) BEFORE SUBMITTING -->
<!-- PLEASE READ OUR CODE OF CONDUCT (https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md) AND CONTRIBUTING GUIDELINES (https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md) BEFORE SUBMITTING -->
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-11 07:55:43 +00:00

👍 I think I also need to clarify that discussion issue means software suggestion to distinguish it from discussions about news which we hoped to move to the forums.

:+1: I think I also need to clarify that discussion issue means software suggestion to distinguish it from discussions about news which we hoped to move to the forums.
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-11 07:56:00 +00:00

I guess

I guess
.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
@ -2,3 +1,4 @@
<!-- PLEASE READ OUR CODE OF CONDUCT (https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md) AND CONTRIBUTING GUIDELINES (https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md) BEFORE SUBMITTING -->
## Description
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-11 07:55:05 +00:00

👍

:+1:
Mikaela commented 2019-09-11 07:58:00 +00:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

@privacytoolsIO/editorial What are your thoughts on the Open Source Software vs Free/Libre Software?

@privacytoolsIO/editorial What are your thoughts on the Open Source Software vs Free/Libre Software?
nitrohorse commented 2019-09-12 01:37:53 +00:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

@privacytoolsIO/editorial What are your thoughts on the Open Source Software vs Free/Libre Software?

So currently the template states:

[ ] This project is free/libre software.

While the suggested change is:

[ ] The project is open source software.

From my observation of ptio, it seems like we aim for the software ptio suggests to be free/libre but also accept software that isn't "free" (apologies, I don't have examples at the moment, but I'm sure there are throughout the site). So the free/libre aspect seems to be our goal, not a requirement. If this is true, then the suggested change makes sense to implement and we could also expand it to something like this for clarity?

[ ] The project is [open source software](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software). <!-- Even better if it's free (https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html) / libre software (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software)! -->
> @privacytoolsIO/editorial What are your thoughts on the Open Source Software vs Free/Libre Software? So currently the template states: > [ ] This project is [free/libre software](https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software). While the suggested change is: > [ ] The project is [open source software](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software). From my observation of ptio, it seems like we aim for the software ptio suggests to be free/libre but also accept software that isn't "free" (apologies, I don't have examples at the moment, but I'm sure there are throughout the site). So the free/libre aspect seems to be our goal, not a requirement. If this is true, then the suggested change makes sense to implement and we could also expand it to something like this for clarity? ``` [ ] The project is [open source software](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software). <!-- Even better if it's free (https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html) / libre software (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software)! --> ```
dawidpotocki commented 2019-09-12 12:21:31 +00:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

Why not just

- [ ] The project is [Free Libre](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software) and/or [Open Source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software) Software
Why not just ``` - [ ] The project is [Free Libre](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software) and/or [Open Source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software) Software ```
👍 1
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) reviewed 2019-09-12 21:06:29 +00:00
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) left a comment

oh, I forgot to comment these, but GItHub remembers

oh, I forgot to comment these, but GItHub remembers
.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
@ -1,19 +1,17 @@
<!-- PLEASE READ OUR CONTRIBUTING GUIDELINES (https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md) BEFORE SUBMITTING -->
<!-- PLEASE READ OUR CODE OF CONDUCT (https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md) AND CONTRIBUTING GUIDELINES (https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md) BEFORE SUBMITTING -->
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-12 21:01:11 +00:00

Sorry, I have to mess it up, because if there are multiple issues, Resolves: #1, #2 closes only #1.

Sorry, I have to mess it up, because if there are multiple issues, `Resolves: #1, #2` closes only `#1`.
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-12 21:02:05 +00:00

No, I seem to be simplifying it more due to the other thread where I remove mentioning on the issue.

No, I seem to be simplifying it more due to the other thread where I remove mentioning on the issue.
Mikaela commented 2019-09-12 21:17:20 +00:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

It seems that this PR became wider than intented.

It seems that this PR became wider than intented.
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) reviewed 2019-09-12 21:23:04 +00:00
.github/CONTRIBUTING.md
@ -8,2 +8,4 @@
- English only.
- Be constructive.
- Please feel free to *review changes* in the *files changed* tab of any
pull request at any time.
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-12 21:19:15 +00:00

The only change I could do towards https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/issues/1296, but I don't feel comfortable closing it in case there will be ideas and concensus for something more.

The only change I could do towards https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/issues/1296, but I don't feel comfortable closing it in case there will be ideas and concensus for something more.
.github/CONTRIBUTING.md
@ -9,1 +9,4 @@
- Be constructive.
- Please feel free to *review changes* in the *files changed* tab of any
pull request at any time.
- See also our [Code of Conduct](https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md)
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-12 21:20:05 +00:00

I think it should be mentioned together with "rules" which I would be comfortable removing entirely instead pointing only to it. We also don't have the "English only" documented anywhere else. Do we?

I think it should be mentioned together with "rules" which I would be comfortable removing entirely instead pointing only to it. We also don't have the "English only" documented anywhere else. Do we?
.github/CONTRIBUTING.md
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-12 21:20:43 +00:00

I didn't start removing things here as they are both mentioned.

I didn't start removing things here as they are both mentioned.
.github/CONTRIBUTING.md
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-12 21:20:57 +00:00

I understand the priority to be that the source code can be seen.

I understand the priority to be that the source code can be seen.
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-12 21:21:52 +00:00

aargh, spot a typo and make it more typo again

- Must be [H-Node Class A](https://h-node.org/wiki/page/en/compatibility-classes) or equivalent (if applicable)
aargh, spot a typo and make it more typo again ```suggestion - Must be [H-Node Class A](https://h-node.org/wiki/page/en/compatibility-classes) or equivalent (if applicable) ```
.github/CONTRIBUTING.md
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-12 21:21:20 +00:00

I understand the priority to be that the source code can be seen. However I am not sure if IMAP is OSS, isn't it the protocol?

I understand the priority to be that the source code can be seen. However I am not sure if IMAP is OSS, isn't it the protocol?
.github/CONTRIBUTING.md
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-12 21:22:22 +00:00

Should this again be Free / Open Source Software?

Should this again be Free / Open Source Software?
.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
@ -5,3 +5,3 @@
Resolves: #none <!-- The number of the issue that is resolved by this pull request. If there is none, feel free to delete this line -->
Resolves: #none <!-- A link to the (discussion) issue resolved by this pull request. There must be a discussion issue here at GitHub, before a pull request of software/service suggestion can be considered for merging. -->
#### Check List <!-- Please add an x in each box below, like so: [x] -->
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-12 21:22:56 +00:00

I think this is necessary if we are removing the "has associated discussion" part.

I think this is necessary if we are removing the "has associated discussion" part.
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) reviewed 2019-09-12 21:25:05 +00:00
.github/CONTRIBUTING.md
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-12 21:25:05 +00:00

I noticed it by accident

I noticed it by accident
nitrohorse (Migrated from github.com) reviewed 2019-09-13 01:34:52 +00:00
.github/CONTRIBUTING.md
@ -9,1 +9,4 @@
- Be constructive.
- Please feel free to *review changes* in the *files changed* tab of any
pull request at any time.
- See also our [Code of Conduct](https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md)
nitrohorse (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-13 01:34:51 +00:00

Not anywhere else, no. I think it's good to add a link to it as a reminder.

Not anywhere else, no. I think it's good to add a link to it as a reminder.
nitrohorse (Migrated from github.com) reviewed 2019-09-13 01:36:17 +00:00
.github/CONTRIBUTING.md
nitrohorse (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-13 01:36:17 +00:00

I think it means the provider allows IMAP so users can access it via client that's open source.

I think it means the provider allows IMAP so users can access it via client that's open source.
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) reviewed 2019-09-13 10:21:37 +00:00
.github/CONTRIBUTING.md
@ -9,1 +9,4 @@
- Be constructive.
- Please feel free to *review changes* in the *files changed* tab of any
pull request at any time.
- See also our [Code of Conduct](https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md)
Mikaela (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-13 10:21:02 +00:00

Sorry, could you clarify? It's good to add a link to the CoC as a reminder here, or should English-only be documented somewhere else?

I kind of would like to have language specific subforums and accept contributions or at least feedback in other languages too, assuming we have team member(s) fluent in that language.

Sorry, could you clarify? It's good to add a link to the CoC as a reminder here, or should English-only be documented somewhere else? I kind of would like to have language specific subforums and accept contributions or at least feedback in other languages too, assuming we have team member(s) fluent in that language.
nitrohorse (Migrated from github.com) approved these changes 2019-09-13 13:48:13 +00:00
nitrohorse (Migrated from github.com) left a comment

LGTM

LGTM
.github/CONTRIBUTING.md
@ -9,1 +9,4 @@
- Be constructive.
- Please feel free to *review changes* in the *files changed* tab of any
pull request at any time.
- See also our [Code of Conduct](https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/blob/master/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md)
nitrohorse (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-13 13:46:31 +00:00

Sorry, I meant to say I think we only have this English only version of the CoC at the moment so adding a link to it like your change does I think is good 👍🏼

Sorry, I meant to say I think we only have this English only version of the CoC at the moment so adding a link to it like your change does I think is good 👍🏼
.github/CONTRIBUTING.md
nitrohorse (Migrated from github.com) commented 2019-09-13 13:47:23 +00:00

Yeah, I would think so for consistency

Yeah, I would think so for consistency
blacklight447 (Migrated from github.com) approved these changes 2019-09-13 15:02:19 +00:00
jonah approved these changes 2019-09-23 19:53:35 +00:00
jonah left a comment

Thanks!

Thanks!
This repo is archived. You cannot comment on pull requests.
Reviewers
No reviewers
jonah
privacytoolsIO
ghbjklhv1
nitrohorse
blacklight447
Labels
Clear labels   
🔍🤖 Search Engines

   
approved

approved, waiting for a PR

  
dependencies

Pull requests that update a dependency file

  
duplicate

   
feedback wanted

   
high priority

   
I2P

The Invisible Internet Project (I2P)

  
iOS

   
low priority

   
OS

Operating Systems

  
Self-contained networks

   
Social media

   
stale

A label for stalebot if it gets added

  
streaming

Anything related to media streaming.

  
todo

   
Tor

Anything covering the Tor network

  
WIP

active work in progress, do not merge or PR (yet)!

  
wontfix

Issues or bugs that will not be fixed and/or do not have significant impact on the project.

  
XMPP

Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol

  
[m]

Matrix protocol

  
₿ cryptocurrency

   
ℹ️ help wanted

   
↔️ file sharing

   
⚙️ web extensions

Browser Extension related issues

  
✨ enhancement

   
❌ software removal

   
💬 discussion

   
🤖 Android

   
🐛 bug

   
💢 conflicting

   
📝 correction

Correction of content on the website

  
🆘 critical

   
📧 email

   
🔒 file encryption

   
📁 file storage

   
🦊 Firefox

Firefox & forks, about:config etc.

  
💻 hardware

   
🌐 hosting

   
🏠 housekeeping

Anything primarily related to site cleanup.

  
🔐 password managers

   
🧰 productivity tools

   
🔎 research required

   
🌐 Social News Aggregators

   
🆕 software suggestion

   
👥 team chat

   
🔒 VPN

Virtual Private Network

  
🌐 website issue

*Technical* issues with the website.

  
🚫 Windows

   
👁️ browsers

   
🖊️ digital notebooks

   
🗄️ DNS

Domain Name System

  
🗨️ instant messaging (im)

   
🇦🇶 translations

Anything covering a translated version of the site

No Label
🔍🤖 Search Engines
approved
dependencies
duplicate
feedback wanted
high priority
I2P
iOS
low priority
OS
Self-contained networks
Social media
stale
streaming
todo
Tor
WIP
wontfix
XMPP
[m]
₿ cryptocurrency
ℹ️ help wanted
↔️ file sharing
⚙️ web extensions
✨ enhancement
❌ software removal
💬 discussion
🤖 Android
🐛 bug
💢 conflicting
📝 correction
🆘 critical
📧 email
🔒 file encryption
📁 file storage
🦊 Firefox
💻 hardware
🌐 hosting
🏠 housekeeping
🔐 password managers
🧰 productivity tools
🔎 research required
🌐 Social News Aggregators
🆕 software suggestion
👥 team chat
🔒 VPN
🌐 website issue
🚫 Windows
👁️ browsers
🖊️ digital notebooks
🗄️ DNS
🗨️ instant messaging (im)
🇦🇶 translations
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No Milestone
Assignees
Clear assignees
No Assignees
1 Participants
Due Date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format 'yyyy-mm-dd'.

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: privacyguides/privacytools.io#1291
No description provided.
Delete Branch "pr-template"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?