Forks should not tag and link back to UBQ issues

[Keyrxng]

It's probably a good idea that forks of the dev-pool not link back to UBQ issues so that it prevents issues being spammed with comments like:

@[korrrba-bot](https://github.com/apps/korrrba-bot) korrrba-bot bot mentioned this issue [on Nov 6, 2023](https://github.com/ubiquity/audit.ubq.fi/issues/4) https://github.com/korrrba/devpool-directory/issues/16

• Example: Audits: Owed Payments (Unpaid But Permitted) ubiquity/audit.ubq.fi#4

The example shows three links and I could fetch more examples but you get the gist. I was scanning to see what other bounties I'd be able to take on and while atm it's not so bad you can see how it might snowball as the hunter base grows and may potentially confuse first timers but it would keep things cleaner regardless.

I'm not 100% on how to implement this exactly with all the moving parts at the minute so rfc from core team

Objective

• Prefix any GitHub links with www. so that the GitHub UI does not "link back"
• Refer to Forks should not tag and link back to UBQ issues #15 (comment) for more information

[0x4007]

Something as simple as ORG !== "Ubiquity" then wrap the link in backticks so it can still be read on their fork but it doesn't cause a linkback, maybe

This seems like it has potential. I very lightly worked with this codebase so I am not very confident with the best approach. Maybe @rndquu or @FernandVEYRIER know better

[rndquu]

I agree this could be annoying with multiple forks.

We could simply restrict the sync workflow to run only for the https://github.com/ubiquity/devpool-directory repo.

There is also this useful thread (especially this comment).

[0x4007]

There is also this useful thread (especially this comment).

Prefixing the URL with www. seems like a simple solution that solves the problem!

However I kind of do like the idea of the bot back linking when its actually "registered" to the DevPool directory. It is an interesting way for the bot to sort of promote the DevPool Directory, but I can see how partners may be annoyed by it.

Let's do www. prefixing then! @Keyrxng

[Keyrxng]

Without a working bot I'm certain I'm unable to QA so maybe not the task for me atm and after the little oversight earlier I'm not wanting to push anything without being able to test it thoroughly so I'm going to pass on this task if that's all good

I did run the script and saw the correct outputs but cannot QA properly although the prefix does deffo work (still) see here

Just update helpers/github.ts #L71 with below was my basic approach but this will stop the real devpool linking back to UBQ issues too and I wasn't sure if that's acceptable or not

 issues = issues.map((issue) => {
    issue.html_url = issue.html_url.replace("https://github.com", "https://www.github.com");
    return issue;
  });

back linking when its actually "registered" to the DevPool directory.

I'm assuming that there will be a list of partners somewhere down the line that we could check against so that it can link back on partner repos as that is a solid way to promo the bot.

[0x4007]

I think we can probably just merge and try. It seems pretty low stakes. Why don't you open a pull request?

[0x4007]

Funny enough I'm having second thoughts because I noticed a link back on a repository that I didn't want added (I just updated opt.json to fix this.)

I suppose I need to fix the caching issue with work.ubq.fi so that it actually updates the view (currently it doesn't seem to update the new issues after it lands in your cache.)

Can you do me a favor? Can we enable the original behavior for UbiquiBot so that it posts the link back, and then for everybody else, do the www. thing?

Sorry for changing the scope. I think I will feel more comfortable to change this behavior when I see partners complaining about our bot linking back.

[rndquu]

Without a working bot I'm certain I'm unable to QA

As far as I understand you don't need the bot to QA this repo. You need to:

1. Fork https://github.com/ubiquity/devpool-directory
2. Set this const to your fork name
3. Update opt.json and set only 1 single URL in the "in" section with one of your repos where you will create issues that will be synced with your forked devpool directory (when you run index.ts)

[Keyrxng]

So because the script is being run from within an action we could grab who the user is and edit the url that way? I wasn't aware that forks had to change DEVPOOL_OWNER_NAME so this works around that without having to update the workflow

QA here

  try {
    const {
      data: { login },
    } = await octokit.users.getAuthenticated();
    return login && login === "ubiquity" ? true : false;
    ```

[ubiquibot]

+ Evaluating results. Please wait...

[ubiquibot]

[ 30.1 WXDAI ]

@pavlovcik

Contributions Overview

View	Contribution	Count	Reward
Issue	Comment	4	30.1

Conversation Incentives

Comment	Formatting	Relevance	Reward
> Something as simple as ORG !== "Ubiquity" then wrap the link i...	2.9	0.77	2.9
> There is also [this](https://github.com/orgs/community/discuss...	10.8 a: count: 2 score: "2" words: 2 code: count: 2 score: "2" words: 2	0.88	10.8
I think we can probably just merge and try. It seems pretty low ...	2.2	0.58	2.2
Funny enough I'm having second thoughts because I noticed a link...	14.2 a: count: 1 score: "1" words: 3 code: count: 1 score: "1" words: 1	0.74	14.2

[ 97.2 WXDAI ]

@Keyrxng

Contributions Overview

View	Contribution	Count	Reward
Issue	Specification	1	45
Issue	Comment	2	52.2

Conversation Incentives

Comment	Formatting	Relevance	Reward
It's probably a good idea that forks of the dev-pool not link ba...	45 h3: count: 1 score: "1" words: 1 li: count: 3 score: "3" words: 45 code: count: 2 score: "2" words: 39	1	45
Without a working bot I'm certain I'm unable to QA so maybe not ...	37 a: count: 2 score: "2" words: 6 code: count: 1 score: "1" words: 0	0.67	37
So because the script is being run from within an action we coul...	15.2 a: count: 1 score: "1" words: 1 code: count: 2 score: "2" words: 1	0.72	15.2

[ 19.6 WXDAI ]

@rndquu

Contributions Overview

View	Contribution	Count	Reward
Issue	Comment	2	19.6

Conversation Incentives

Comment	Formatting	Relevance	Reward
I agree this could be annoying with multiple forks. We could ...	6.7 a: count: 3 score: "3" words: 3	0.64	6.7
> Without a working bot I'm certain I'm unable to QA As far a...	12.9 a: count: 3 score: "3" words: 5 li: count: 3 score: "3" words: 94	0.71	12.9