Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GitHub Community Forum

github.community

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 46 posts

Re: GitHub Community Forum

#21

Post by oneeyedpigeon »

breakingcups wrote: post #12
oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope so, clicking on 'sign in' logged me into my github account with no further action. Does anyone know how they did that?

You're probably already logged in on the main Github.com domain. You were redirected from the community domain to the main domain to log in. Once there, the system saw you were already logged in and redirected you back to the community site with some proper tokens in the url to identify you.

But they're different domains; how are they identifying me as a client?

Re: GitHub Community Forum

#22

Post by dx034 »

joefreeman wrote: post #16
dingaling wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My UK bank recently started using nationwide.nationwide-service.co.uk as an origin for e-mails. I had to check WHOIS and contact them to ensure it was valid, it just sounded so phishy. Given that previously nationwide.co.uk was used and trusted, I wonder what internal discussions led to selecting that new domain and why. And what advocates for the end-users spoke up and said "whoa dudes that's just confusing".

It's fairly common for companies to send automated e-mails from a separate domain to try to mitigate the impact of spam filters. ceo@company.com doesn't want her e-mails to be marked as spam just because some marketing e-mails are being sent from noreply@company.com.

Not sure why you're being downvoted, that's likely the reason. Employee email addresses will be sent with @nationwide.co.uk and even if the communication in this case was important, enough people will mark it as spam. Using a second domain helps keeping the domain clean.

Re: GitHub Community Forum

#23

Post by kroltan »

oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #21
breakingcups wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're probably already logged in on the main Github.com domain. You were redirected from the community domain to the main domain to log in. Once there, the system saw you were already logged in and redirected you back to the community site with some proper tokens in the url to identify you.

But they're different domains; how are they identifying me as a client?

github.community isn't. It sends you to github.com regardless, since their login is there. github.com sees you're already logged in, and redirects back, passing auth.

Re: GitHub Community Forum

#24

Post by twinsart »

Operyl wrote: post #4

Ehhhh, so, like. GitHub is big on open source stuff, supposedly. Love that they went with lithium stuff instead of some of the more open source solutions that could've used the manpower from GitHub.

They say why here: https://github.community/t5/Welcome/Why-is-the-GitHub-Commun...

Re: GitHub Community Forum

#25

Post by chrismorgan »

kroltan wrote: post #23
oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But they're different domains; how are they identifying me as a client?

github.community isn't. It sends you to github.com regardless, since their login is there. github.com sees you're already logged in, and redirects back, passing auth.

That suggests it’s bypassing OAuth—with OAuth you’d get a “GitHub Community wants access to X, Y and Z” interstitial.

Re: GitHub Community Forum

#26

Post by cstuder »

ashtube wrote: post #20
conradk wrote: post #11

I really dislike it when companies use a new extension like "github.community" instead of a subdomain like "community.github.com" because there is no real way to know if the site is a phishing attempt or not. Getting people used to accept going to another site seems very bad for security. Especially when there are already domains like http://github.co (notice the .CO instead of .COM) that don't belong to the trademar…

Also from an SEO perspective, they could have bumped their domain authority even further by using the same domain - they now need to grow this new domain from square 1, and it's going to be hard, even for a large company like Github.

What do they have to fear? The market for Github forums isn't that big.

Re: GitHub Community Forum

#27

Post by Operyl »

r3bl wrote: post #18
Operyl wrote: post #4

Ehhhh, so, like. GitHub is big on open source stuff, supposedly. Love that they went with lithium stuff instead of some of the more open source solutions that could've used the manpower from GitHub.

Interestingly, one of the "new subcommunities" (linked in the footer) seems to be Discourse: https://education.github.community/ And the Atom discussion area is too (but that's been up for a while): https://discuss.atom.io/

Sounds like it was probably an internal debate on the matter then. At least 2/3 prevailed, hah.

Re: GitHub Community Forum

#28

Post by pronoiac »

conradk wrote: post #11

I really dislike it when companies use a new extension like "github.community" instead of a subdomain like "community.github.com" because there is no real way to know if the site is a phishing attempt or not. Getting people used to accept going to another site seems very bad for security. Especially when there are already domains like http://github.co (notice the .CO instead of .COM) that don't belong to the trademar…

My immediate thought is that they did this for browser security reasons, like how they use github.io for Github Pages.

Re: GitHub Community Forum

#29

Post by ryanSrich »

superplussed wrote: post #8

Man, the design of this is so unpolished that I actually find it a bit stressful to look at. The lack of grid adherence, the strange hierarchy of font sizes, it doesn't seem up to Github's normal high standards of clean and sensible design choices. But then I guess it's new and they'll refine it.

Yeah it's incredibly weird how unfinished this seems.

Look at the navigation hierarchy. There are two nav background colors, but you can barely see the difference (even on a new MBP). The search input blends into the nav background, and not in a stylistic way, it seems completely on accident.

The "Community Forum" logo type looks off brand.

The iconography illustration in the masthead was mailed in. It's just the same two icons copy pasted.

The card layout at the bottom seems very un-github as well. They are typically very good at handling large amounts of text and information, but those cards are really hard to read. They bounce around from center-aligned lists (usually a bad idea) to nested columns.

I will say the community search is nice.

Re: GitHub Community Forum

#30

Post by 3pt14159 »

joefreeman wrote: post #16
dingaling wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My UK bank recently started using nationwide.nationwide-service.co.uk as an origin for e-mails. I had to check WHOIS and contact them to ensure it was valid, it just sounded so phishy. Given that previously nationwide.co.uk was used and trusted, I wonder what internal discussions led to selecting that new domain and why. And what advocates for the end-users spoke up and said "whoa dudes that's just confusing".

It's fairly common for companies to send automated e-mails from a separate domain to try to mitigate the impact of spam filters. ceo@company.com doesn't want her e-mails to be marked as spam just because some marketing e-mails are being sent from noreply@company.com.

And I take it using a separate subdomain wont work either? I.E. if you send mail from hi@marketing.example.com it will still hurt frank@example.com so they need to get a different domain?
Post reply on HN