Comments!
lolmaus opened this issue · comments
Gists support comments. This is the main reason why i would prefer vanilla Gists over Draft.sx.
You could probably make use of Disqus?
I can even imagine enabling comments conditionally via gist description or a config file attached to the gist.
Comment support does seem like a very useful feature that shouldn't be terribly hard to implement. I'm wondering which would be the best way to enable it, though. E.g. following the Jekyll route and doing something like
comments: true
---
Or having to create a separate config file as you suggested. Do you see any advantages/disadvantages in one of the approaches?
If Disqus would be used, would you want to supply your own disqus handle? Because if I used a draft.sx specific comment handle, you wouldn't be able to moderate the comment thread on your own gist.
Or perhaps it'd be enough to just load the comments from the Gist and display them on draft.sx, with a "Comment" button taking you to Github? That would avoid the problem of possibly creating two separate comment threads whose information partially overlaps.
A more sophisticated way would be to use GitHub auth to actually login and be able to post comments on draft.sx which are then sent to the GitHub API. That'd require a lot of logic on the draft.sx side though.
I'm not interested in launching my own draft.sx instance. I would like to use the public centralized version.
And i was thinking of a way to let users choose whether they want comments enabled for each publication individually.
An author of a gist could add a second file, for example, draftsx.json. Draft.sx could detect and parse that file clientside and decide on enabling comments.
If Disqus would be used, would you want to supply your own disqus handle? Because if I used a draft.sx specific comment handle, you wouldn't be able to moderate the comment thread on your own gist.
Yes, per-instance handle is a must.
Or perhaps it'd be enough to just load the comments from the Gist and display them on draft.sx, with a "Comment" button taking you to Github? That would avoid the problem of possibly creating two separate comment threads whose information partially overlaps.
This reduces commenters to Github users, while Disqus allows to login via major OAuth providers.
But you could probably allow instance owner to choose between Github and Disqus comments?
Hi, I figured out that you can enable Disqus comments just by pasting the Disqus code at the bottom of the markdown file.
I came to the conclusion that I'm not really comfortable supporting Disqus integration, for pretty much the same reasons stated here:
No anonymous comments (IP address, email and name recorded), hosted in the USA, third-party. Just like IntenseDebate, livefrye etc. When you embed Disqus, they can do anything with your readers (and probably mine Bitcoins, see the loading times).
I'll take a look at the open alternatives and maybe install one of those alongside draft.sx. Until then, @andrewcchen's solution should work fine :)
@x3ro Open alternatives require own hosting, right?
In principle, yes. If its not overly complex/load intensive I might install a copy of e.g. "Isso" alongside draft.sx on the same server and add the option to embed it into the draft automatically.
I've followed @andrewcchen's suggestion. It's really plain and simple, and author gets total control over comments.
I believe we can close this issue after writing up a tutorial on inserting Disqus.
Probably comments can be synced with GH even without requiring the commenter to authenticate — the GH version of the comments can be created by some bot user (something like @DraftsxAnonymous).