documentation
documentation copied to clipboard
iv-org
Rewrite the public instances list
Rendered version: https://github.com/TheFrenchGhosty/documentation/blob/instances-list-rewrite/Public-Instances.md
This PR is a rewrite of the public instances list from scratch.
- Instances list is now in a table, making things a LOT easier to read
- The plain text version of the table is readable (disable word wrap)
- A lot of information have been added to ease the management (mainly internally) but also so that users are aware of who runs X instance
- Prerequisites have been rewritten better, and new one have been added
It is "incomplete" in the sense that it's missing the link to some privacy policies, and the owners of the Tor onion, but it's enough for https://github.com/iv-org/instances-api to be adapted to work with it.
It mustn't be merged before https://github.com/iv-org/instances-api is ready to support it. (@syeopite seems to plan to rewrite its parser)
Took me around to do ~2 hours, it was a lot more time consuming that I expected.
Note:
The wording of some categories have to be discussed (mainly "DDos Protection / MITM").
@syeopite You're right, I got confused by this commit: https://github.com/iv-org/documentation/commit/a6fdd0eb07ec0fce433ea9b3c9652f3c45118dba / https://github.com/iv-org/documentation/pull/39
Should something like "Instances using a modified source code, are required to publish their source code before they can be added to the list, and must timely publish any later modification in a timely manner." be added to prevent another #72 from happening?
@FireMasterK
Should something like "Instances using a modified source code, are required to publish their source code before they can be added to the list, and must timely publish any later modification in a timely manner." be added to prevent another #72 from happening?
Done, thanks :)
I think we should add an uptime requirement. Any instance that is down most of the time should not be added to the official list imo.
@syeopite
I think we should add an uptime requirement. Any instance that is down most of the time should not be added to the official list imo.
This is a good idea, should how much should we require? 75%?
@syeopite
I think we should add an uptime requirement. Any instance that is down most of the time should not be added to the official list imo.
This is a good idea, should how much should we require? 75%?
At the very least 90% because it's still like almost 3 days per month of downtime:
Source: https://uptime.is/
@unixfox
@syeopite
I think we should add an uptime requirement. Any instance that is down most of the time should not be added to the official list imo.
This is a good idea, should how much should we require? 75%?
At the very least 90% because it's still like almost 3 days per months of downtime:
Yeah, you're right. 90% is the way to go I guess.
This PR can get merged soon. I've finished the parser rewrite for the instances-api a few days ago. See iv-org/instances-api#30
Owner for https://notyoutube.org is wrong. The actual owner is dejalavidavolar. See #58. But due to #82 it should be removed