Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Feature Request: Make it easier to communicate compliance failures to pinning service providers #125

Closed
SgtPooki opened this issue Jun 21, 2022 · 5 comments
Labels

Comments

@SgtPooki
Copy link
Member

SgtPooki commented Jun 21, 2022

In order to keep manual effort to a minimum, we should automate communication of compliance failures as much as possible. There are a few methods I've thought about to accomplish this:

  • After a report is run, if there are compliance check failures, email the pinning service provider with a link to the report.
  • Inside each report there should be a link for "submitting an issue" to the appropriate pinning service provider that would prefill the appropriate information
    • Should we create an issue link for each compliance check failure or a single one for each report?
  • We should have a POC for each pinning service added to the compliance checker, so we can tag them on discussions like Feature proposal: testing replace endpoint with the same CID #124 and THIS issue.

Pinning service provider repos and/or URLs:

@SgtPooki
Copy link
Member Author

Got a response from Pinata:

hey [ @SgtPooki ] we don’t have an official place for this right now, but an issue on the actual pinning services spec repo might be helpful here - @obo20

Also related is #140 so that services could add checks into their CI/CD workflow.

@SgtPooki
Copy link
Member Author

@lidel are you cool with me opening pinning compliance issues for Pinata on the spec repo, or should I open them here?

@SgtPooki
Copy link
Member Author

SgtPooki commented Jun 27, 2022

For now, we're going to point providers towards #140, and have them handle their own destiny. We will, as a one-time only thing, open a single issue in the appropriate repositories to let providers know of any failures, but after that it will be up to providers to handle the aforementioned destiny.

@lidel
Copy link
Member

lidel commented Jun 27, 2022

@SgtPooki I think your approach is sensible 👍

Providing NPM package that pinning services can run on their own is more than enough to run in any CI setup services have:

npx @ipfs-shipyard/pinning-service-compliance -s <endpoint> <auth>

I like the idea of going the extra mile and doing one-time ping + providing Github Action (#140) , but don't think we should be doing more handholding than that :-)

@SgtPooki
Copy link
Member Author

Cool thanks for the second set of eyes :)

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants