Privacy_Statement_Draft
#26
Merged
meaz
merged 30 commits from Privacy_Statement_Draft into master 3 years ago
antilopa
fede
meaz
muppeth
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
There is no content yet.
Delete Branch 'Privacy_Statement_Draft'
Deleting a branch is permanent. It CANNOT be undone. Continue?
Final draft.
We should add link to the GIT Repository (commit page of master) with information that people can check version history of the document.
Also we should add 1.2 tag on the merge.
I would rather remove the first sentence:
"
All and any changes to the Privacy Statement will be publicly available and will be communicated to all users via our social networks and blog bosts.
We recommend that you regularly check for any changes on this Statement.
"
ou can follow the history of changes on this document on our
git repositoryversion control system hereStill missing the piece about english version taking precendence.
"This ducument has been written originally in English by Disroot.org "core team" and is the only text version for which we are responsible for.
maybe "which we can be held responsible for"?
also "core team" is a bit vague and can change, i think leaving it as Disroot.org - the organization - is more professional.
actualy it should be - Stichting Disroot.org
"This document has been written originally in English and is the only version for which stichting Disroot.org can be held responsible." (or accountable also sounds good)
👍
it seems perfect to me
👍🎉🎉🎉
One more thing that caught my attention before we merge (glad @antilopa didnt approve it yet).
I think we didnt look into layout of the page. Seeing that the breakline is right after TOC and I think none of the points actually link to TOC so cant navigate using it.
Also line break in this template means to start second column so we will have currently only TOC on the left side and entire document on the right side which i think is not whatwe wanted to do.
@antilopa can you move this file to the website vagrant and check it?
We need to check the layout of the page to make sure its correct and that TOC links to all the points in the document.
@muppeth you are right, the horizontal line in the template of the PP seperates the two columns. But I think if we get the text right here in this repo, it is enough. The layout will be something to figure out when merging it in the website repo. Don't you think?
@antilopa well it depends what we want.
If we have both files same its easier to make checksum of the file to be sure the text is correct and not tempered with (could even have set alert on that)
If the document is only to see history, we should then remove the markdown grav header and all the other markdown formating so its easier for people to read.
Same as point 2 but with md formatting still there but without the grav header
How will things work? I mean, each change will be made in this repo, then merged in Website repo?
If this is the case, I think 1st solution of muppeth is better. Otherwise, that means that each time we change something here, we have to update the Website version manually.
I don't really get it. Any changed made should always be updated on the website. We are not pulling this repo directly into grav are we?
Secondly, the PP is not only for the website, some services has their own place for PP. And what if we decide to change the layout on the website?
I think this repo should be for version control, and can be stripped of most MD, unless useful here. checksum would be nice but wouldn't work in this case.
yeah so we seem to have unsolved issue here then. Specially that I agree with all two ideas.
Maybe indeed to make things easier at least for now, we should keep this repo as a non markdown version, so just plain text, which would be easier for people to ead through and in case we need to copyt PP elsewhere (same goes for TOS), we dont need to strip it from markdown (in case we need to do for example html as is in pwm). This also makes it easy for people to read and follow rather then going through the markdown syntax.
Just to push things forward as it's taking way too long now, I would suggest this and then in the future if we think this isnt working right, change it to be exact copy of the website's page.
Fine with me.
I almost agree :P I think there is a value to some MD so it is nicely formatted and easy to read here too. But I will keep it to a minimum - meaning mainly headers and lists.
After talking about this a bit more I'm finally convinced about the @muppeth's first option. It means we will not have a PP page on the website but it will be pulled for this repo. Then the content cannot be changed without enough approval which is good.
That said, we now need to check the layout on the website and adjust the file here to look right before we can merge it. We also need to figure out the file naming (on the website it is two-col.html.twig) and other practicalities.
And the practicalities would be adding gitignore file on pages repo to not pull privacy policy etc. so bacially we would be pulling directly from here. If so, does that also apply to TOS repo? it should.
Yes, I think we should do the same with TOS repo
Changed retention of XMPP to 1 month; removed Diaspora; fixed lists to use '-' instead of numbers everywhere (for consistency sake)
Added version number
Removed Diaspora* from the federated services examples at the definitions section
Last checks on vagrant before final approval:
@antilopa I would say remove it from this document
Muppeth approves this merge
ac3756f89a.Step 1:
From your project repository, check out a new branch and test the changes.Step 2:
Merge the changes and update on Forgejo.