Skip to content

Conversation

simi
Copy link
Contributor

@simi simi commented Sep 30, 2023

rendered proposal

I was iterating over user profile few times recently and it seems empty to me. Often I would like to get more info about gem author.

By making social links more generic, we can fix rubygems/rubygems.org#3321 and also make it simpler to maintain changes like Twitter to X renaming.

@indirect
Copy link
Contributor

I like this, and think it's a good idea. 👍🏻

@martinemde
Copy link
Contributor

This makes sense to me too. 👍

Copy link
Contributor

@segiddins segiddins left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Definitely 👍🏻 on adding this, but I do want to see some consideration given for the best way to store the additional links, without being too inflexible for future evolution

# Unresolved questions

- What mechanisms can we deploy to guarantee the appropriateness of external links? GitHub allows any link with no verification.
- How might these links factor into prospective verification processes in the future?
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This will tie in super nicely to rubygems/rubygems.org#4062, since it allows for verifying different types of entities. We could allow verifying user links in addition to rubygem links very easily

For implementation:

1. Add a new input field designated for the homepage URL.
2. Integrate four input fields specifically for social network links.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

would we store 4 links directly on the User model? or add a CustomLink table, and allow a user to have_many :custom_links and then verify that they only have 4?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants