Welcome to Codidact Meta!
Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.
Post History
Given that QPixel is open source, shouldn't bug reports go on the GitHub repo instead of as a Q&A on meta? The description on codidact.com says "Our meta site for issues regarding community and...
#5: Question closed
by
Canina
·
2020-07-19T13:11:37Z (almost 4 years ago)
#4: Post edited
by
pxeger
·
2020-07-19T13:04:23Z (almost 4 years ago)
undo previous edit
- Given that QPixel is open source, shouldn't bug reports go on the GitHub repo instead of as a Q&A on meta? The description on codidact.com says "Our meta site for issues regarding community and network governance", not about feature requests and bugs. But they are explicitly one of the four choices for required tags section?
- Especially since Codidact is only one instance of any number, because QPixel is self-hostable, putting the issues on one of the instances makes it seem, like, too centralised?
- Whichever we choose, I think it should be only one because this fragmentation is a little silly IMO
- Feature requests make a bit more sense to be here because they involve more discussion from the wider community, but maybe they should be initially proposed here and then their implementation tracked as a GitHub issue?
- Or perhaps GitHub issues are too high a barrier to entry for non-programmers (needs an account, and basic knowledge of how GitHub works) and I'm oversimplifying it because *I personally* am comfortable with GitHub?
Edit: I just discovered there is also a [Trello board](https://trello.com/b/BK4uxLoP/codidact-todo) (although I think it makes sense to have this as well, as a public window into the internal status/development)<details><summary>Ignore this, just testing some stuff</summary><p onclick="alert(1)">click me</p><a href="javascript:alert(1)">click me</a><img onerror="javascript:alert(1)" src=x></details>
- Given that QPixel is open source, shouldn't bug reports go on the GitHub repo instead of as a Q&A on meta? The description on codidact.com says "Our meta site for issues regarding community and network governance", not about feature requests and bugs. But they are explicitly one of the four choices for required tags section?
- Especially since Codidact is only one instance of any number, because QPixel is self-hostable, putting the issues on one of the instances makes it seem, like, too centralised?
- Whichever we choose, I think it should be only one because this fragmentation is a little silly IMO
- Feature requests make a bit more sense to be here because they involve more discussion from the wider community, but maybe they should be initially proposed here and then their implementation tracked as a GitHub issue?
- Or perhaps GitHub issues are too high a barrier to entry for non-programmers (needs an account, and basic knowledge of how GitHub works) and I'm oversimplifying it because *I personally* am comfortable with GitHub?
- Edit: I just discovered there is also a [Trello board](https://trello.com/b/BK4uxLoP/codidact-todo) (although I think it makes sense to have this as well, as a public window into the internal status/development)
#3: Post edited
by
pxeger
·
2020-07-19T13:03:27Z (almost 4 years ago)
add some xss testing things ;)
- Given that QPixel is open source, shouldn't bug reports go on the GitHub repo instead of as a Q&A on meta? The description on codidact.com says "Our meta site for issues regarding community and network governance", not about feature requests and bugs. But they are explicitly one of the four choices for required tags section?
- Especially since Codidact is only one instance of any number, because QPixel is self-hostable, putting the issues on one of the instances makes it seem, like, too centralised?
- Whichever we choose, I think it should be only one because this fragmentation is a little silly IMO
- Feature requests make a bit more sense to be here because they involve more discussion from the wider community, but maybe they should be initially proposed here and then their implementation tracked as a GitHub issue?
- Or perhaps GitHub issues are too high a barrier to entry for non-programmers (needs an account, and basic knowledge of how GitHub works) and I'm oversimplifying it because *I personally* am comfortable with GitHub?
Edit: I just discovered there is also a [Trello board](https://trello.com/b/BK4uxLoP/codidact-todo) (although I think it makes sense to have this as well, as a public window into the internal status/development)
- Given that QPixel is open source, shouldn't bug reports go on the GitHub repo instead of as a Q&A on meta? The description on codidact.com says "Our meta site for issues regarding community and network governance", not about feature requests and bugs. But they are explicitly one of the four choices for required tags section?
- Especially since Codidact is only one instance of any number, because QPixel is self-hostable, putting the issues on one of the instances makes it seem, like, too centralised?
- Whichever we choose, I think it should be only one because this fragmentation is a little silly IMO
- Feature requests make a bit more sense to be here because they involve more discussion from the wider community, but maybe they should be initially proposed here and then their implementation tracked as a GitHub issue?
- Or perhaps GitHub issues are too high a barrier to entry for non-programmers (needs an account, and basic knowledge of how GitHub works) and I'm oversimplifying it because *I personally* am comfortable with GitHub?
- Edit: I just discovered there is also a [Trello board](https://trello.com/b/BK4uxLoP/codidact-todo) (although I think it makes sense to have this as well, as a public window into the internal status/development)
- <details>
- <summary>Ignore this, just testing some stuff</summary>
- <p onclick="alert(1)">click me</p>
- <a href="javascript:alert(1)">click me</a>
- <img onerror="javascript:alert(1)" src=x>
- </details>
#2: Post edited
by
pxeger
·
2020-07-19T12:55:29Z (almost 4 years ago)
add note about trello board
- Given that QPixel is open source, shouldn't bug reports go on the GitHub repo instead of as a Q&A on meta? The description on codidact.com says "Our meta site for issues regarding community and network governance", not about feature requests and bugs. But they are explicitly one of the four choices for required tags section?
- Especially since Codidact is only one instance of any number, because QPixel is self-hostable, putting the issues on one of the instances makes it seem, like, too centralised?
- Whichever we choose, I think it should be only one because this fragmentation is a little silly IMO
- Feature requests make a bit more sense to be here because they involve more discussion from the wider community, but maybe they should be initially proposed here and then their implementation tracked as a GitHub issue?
Or perhaps GitHub issues are too high a barrier to entry for non-programmers (needs an account, and basic knowledge of how GitHub works) and I'm oversimplifying it because *I personally* am comfortable with GitHub?
- Given that QPixel is open source, shouldn't bug reports go on the GitHub repo instead of as a Q&A on meta? The description on codidact.com says "Our meta site for issues regarding community and network governance", not about feature requests and bugs. But they are explicitly one of the four choices for required tags section?
- Especially since Codidact is only one instance of any number, because QPixel is self-hostable, putting the issues on one of the instances makes it seem, like, too centralised?
- Whichever we choose, I think it should be only one because this fragmentation is a little silly IMO
- Feature requests make a bit more sense to be here because they involve more discussion from the wider community, but maybe they should be initially proposed here and then their implementation tracked as a GitHub issue?
- Or perhaps GitHub issues are too high a barrier to entry for non-programmers (needs an account, and basic knowledge of how GitHub works) and I'm oversimplifying it because *I personally* am comfortable with GitHub?
- Edit: I just discovered there is also a [Trello board](https://trello.com/b/BK4uxLoP/codidact-todo) (although I think it makes sense to have this as well, as a public window into the internal status/development)
#1: Initial revision
by
pxeger
·
2020-07-19T12:50:33Z (almost 4 years ago)
Given that QPixel is open source, shouldn't bug reports go on the GitHub repo instead of as a Q&A on meta? The description on codidact.com says "Our meta site for issues regarding community and network governance", not about feature requests and bugs. But they are explicitly one of the four choices for required tags section? Especially since Codidact is only one instance of any number, because QPixel is self-hostable, putting the issues on one of the instances makes it seem, like, too centralised? Whichever we choose, I think it should be only one because this fragmentation is a little silly IMO Feature requests make a bit more sense to be here because they involve more discussion from the wider community, but maybe they should be initially proposed here and then their implementation tracked as a GitHub issue? Or perhaps GitHub issues are too high a barrier to entry for non-programmers (needs an account, and basic knowledge of how GitHub works) and I'm oversimplifying it because *I personally* am comfortable with GitHub?