'Edit this page' option added

[olayway]

Changes

• 'Edit this page' button added at the bottom of the guide, claims, and concepts pages

Notes

I've arbitrarily added this option only for /guide, /claims/[...] and /concepts/[...] pages since it didn't make much sense to me to add it for non-wiki-like pages (e.g. notes from our podcasts which I thought should not be subject to external user's changes). However, not adding this button on a particular page doesn't really prevent a user from finding it directly to GitHub and committing changes.

Content protection

There is no way to create protection rules on GitHub for selected paths or files within a project = protection rules can only be set on a whole branch (but I may be wrong). Thus there seem to be a few options we could consider (I'm no expert in this subject so please take it with a grain of salt):

Solution A

Making the main branch protected and allowing commits only through PRs that require reviews from someone from Life Itself.

Solution B

Making the main branch protected and creating a separate non-protected branch, e.g. contributions that anyone could commit to.

• potential issues: how to make this non-protected branch (contributions) up-to-date with main branch, so that the content the user sees on the webpage (sourced from main) and intends to edit is the same he will see when clicking on 'Edit this page' (redirects to the page file on contributions branch) are in constant alignment.
• possible solution: GitHub Action on push that would automatically pull from main (after someone from Life Itself has pushed some changes) to contributions. However, there may occur some conflicting changes in this case in which such pull would fail, and further action would be required.

Solution C (The best option in my opinion)

Creating an unprotected branch e.g. contributions and creating a submodule of web3 repo, that would point to itself but to its unprotected branch (contributions). So, we would have:

• contributions - unprotected branch with:
  • directories with pages we want others to easily commit to
• main - protected branch with:
  • submodule pointing to the contributions branch of the repo

Flow:

• Some user makes changes to any file and commits them to the contributions branch:

cd web3/submodule-with-unprotected-content
# modify files
git add .
git commit -m "modify submodule-with-unprotected-content files"

• In order to make these changes reflected on the main branch we would do sth like this:

# on web3 repo main branch
git add submodule-with-unprotected-content
git commit -m "record submodule-with-unprotected-content new SHA1"
git push

Reference: https://stackoverflow.com/a/35307501

---

Closing #76

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for boring-fermat-22cb64 ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	eb16e1b
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/boring-fermat-22cb64/deploys/627ce06dc540be00080bc184
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-159--boring-fermat-22cb64.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings.

[khalilcodes]

Hey @olayway your code readability is super. 👏

Regarding pages, the concept here I'm thinking is that anyone is able to contribute here in any way even for small things like spelling mistakes (this has happened) or maybe errors in linking to wrong sites, etc. This is after all a wiki. 😄

I think we should keep it as open as possible (for eg. see cloudflare docs). Except for the homepage, I guess all can work. what do you think ?

comments on updated pr description: direct commits are only possible by members of repo. Non-members have to create a pull request by default after making changes. ie, If someone makes an edit to any page, they have to click the create pull request button on GitHub even if the repo is public (since they are not owner or member, unless otherwise I'm mistaken).

Note: btw why did package-lock.json add ~5800 lines ? is that normal ?

[olayway]

Hey @olayway your code readability is super. clap

Thank you @khalilcodes ! It's very nice to hear it 😊.

Regarding pages, the concept here I'm thinking is that anyone is able to contribute here in any way even for small things like spelling mistakes (this has happened) or maybe errors in linking to wrong sites, etc. This is after all a wiki. smile
I think we should keep it as open as possible (for eg. see cloudflare docs). Except for the homepage, I guess all can work. what do you think ?

You're right and I totally agree with the idea of this project being as open to any public contribution as possible. I think it should work like in Wikipedia - anybody can contribute. However, as far as I'm aware, on Wikipedia, there also are certain restricted parts/pages that are not subject to external (i.e. not coming from Wikipedia Foundation) conribution. In our case, I imagine these would be parts of the web3 project tightly coupled with the LifeItself branding (e.g. page design) and educational activity (webinars, podcast notes etc.). However, if the idea is to hand over the whole project to people so it naturally evolves according to people's needs - then I guess we can keep the whole project fully open.

comments on updated pr description: direct commits are only possible by members of repo. Non-members have to create a pull request by default after making changes. ie, If someone makes an edit to any page, they have to click the create pull request button on GitHub even if the repo is public (since they are not owner or member, unless otherwise I'm mistaken).

You're right 🤦‍♀️. In this case, do you think I should add the prompt 'Edit this page' to all the pages? If so, I'll just make a small tweak in the code and we could merge it.

Note: btw why did package-lock.json add ~5800 lines ? is that normal ?

I was trying to wrap my head around it yesterday as well 😅. And the changes are bizarre, like adding requires: {} or removing dev: true. And I haven't changed a thing in package.json. I've just npm installed a project. I've seen people on stackovrflow reporting similar issues but I couldn't narrow it down to any specific reason. Do you have any suggestions what I could try?

[khalilcodes]

Thanks @olayway for the review on comments.

For now I think let's just merge this and if required we can discuss again and reopen the issue. 👍

Don't really know why that happens with package-lock.json 🤷‍♂️ but maybe we can research on that later too.