[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [tor-bugs] #33008 [Metrics/Relay Search]: Display a bridge's distribution bucket
#33008: Display a bridge's distribution bucket
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Reporter: phw | Owner:
| metrics-team
Type: enhancement | Status:
| needs_review
Priority: Medium | Milestone:
Component: Metrics/Relay Search | Version:
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: s30-o24a1, anti-censorship-roadmap- | Actual Points:
2020Q1 metrics-team-roadmap-2020Q1 |
Parent ID: #31281 | Points: 2
Reviewer: cohosh | Sponsor:
| Sponsor30-can
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Changes (by phw):
* status: needs_revision => needs_review
Comment:
Replying to [comment:16 cohosh]:
> - Is this the main https://bridges.torproject.org page? If so, the steps
for adding bridges are gone and it's unclear to me what the press to
actually get bridges from this page.I'd suggest keeping the steps and
adding this extra info at the very bottom of the page.
[[br]]
No, this page will live at bridges.torproject.org/info. For now, only
Relay Search will link to it, so BridgeDB users won't see it. In the
future, we can use the new /info page to add additional documentation.
[[br]]
> - "Unallocated" isn't a very simple or descriptive word to describe that
bucket. Can we use "private"
> instead? Perhaps this is too late in the game to change it, but it
seems a bit contradictory since these bridges are allocated to the
unallocated bucket.
[[br]]
Yes, I see your point. I don't like "private" because we already use that
term for bridges that don't report themselves to the authority. I like
computer_freak's suggestion of "reserved" but I actually prefer keeping
"unallocated" because the cost of changing this term seems to outweigh the
benefit of using a somewhat more descriptive term.
I wonder what Karsten thinks?
[[br]]
> - This corresponds a bit to the point above, but we could change the
description of the HTTPS bucket to be more clear and include a link to the
page where you actually submit your request.
[[br]]
Good idea, done.
[[br]]
> - There's repeated information on this page between the description of
the Email bucked and the section on `I need an alternative way of getting
bridges!` below it. Can we condense these into the same section? And it
would be great if the resulting section had a `mailto:` link.
[[br]]
Right, that's because BridgeDB includes a short FAQ section at the bottom
of each page. I agree that we don't want that here, so I made the
embedding of the FAQ conditional. I also added a `mailto:` link.
[[br]]
> - This is a nit, but there is some mixing of second and third person
between the old and new content on this page. I think this is fine, but
should be done intentionally.
[[br]]
I believe this is fixed, now that we removed the FAQ?
To make the review easier, I addressed your feedback in a separate patch,
which I will later squash:
https://github.com/NullHypothesis/bridgedb/commit/b39e576eff8ac5ea9436fa5239a53f5edac11911
--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/33008#comment:19>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online
_______________________________________________
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs