gmane.comp.python.devel

Thomas Wouters | 2 Oct 11:57

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed

I hotfixed docs.python.org and www.python.org/doc with some cutesy improv -- the URLs changed from .../lib/ to ../library/, and any HTML pages inside them are completely different. So, any http://docs.python.org/lib/... URL now redirects to the toplevel http://docs.python.org/library/ (and similar for www.python.org/doc/lib.) If anyone feels particularly frustrated by the old URLs breaking, I wouldn't mind adding a redirection for each individual URL as long as I don't have to build that mapping :-)

:-)

Georg is working on fixing the main www.python.org/doc page, I believe, as well as providing downloadable docs.

--
Thomas Wouters <thomas <at> python.org>

Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!

_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

Antoine Pitrou | 2 Oct 12:44

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed

Thomas Wouters <thomas <at> python.org> writes:
> 
> If anyone feels particularly frustrated by the old URLs breaking, I wouldn't
mind adding a redirection for each individual URL as long as I don't have to
build that mapping

Well in general URLs aren't supposed to break (except the ones which are
deliberately temporary). Could a RewriteRule do the trick?

_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

Thomas Wouters | 2 Oct 13:28

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed

On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 12:44, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis <at> pitrou.net> wrote:

Thomas Wouters <thomas <at> python.org> writes:
>
> If anyone feels particularly frustrated by the old URLs breaking, I wouldn't
mind adding a redirection for each individual URL as long as I don't have to
build that mapping

Well in general URLs aren't supposed to break (except the ones which are
deliberately temporary). Could a RewriteRule do the trick?

Not a single one, no. The URLs *all* changed. There is not a single one that's the same. We may be able to do a single rewrite rule for most of the module-*.html URLs, but everything else -- and there is quite a lot of 'else' in the 2.5-and-earlier docs -- needs a better mapping. Feel free to send me that mapping :-)

:-)

--
Thomas Wouters <thomas <at> python.org>

Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!

_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

Doug Hellmann | 2 Oct 13:52

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed

On Oct 2, 2008, at 7:28 AM, Thomas Wouters wrote:

On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 12:44, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis <at> pitrou.net> wrote:

Thomas Wouters <thomas <at> python.org> writes:
>
> If anyone feels particularly frustrated by the old URLs breaking, I wouldn't
mind adding a redirection for each individual URL as long as I don't have to
build that mapping

Well in general URLs aren't supposed to break (except the ones which are
deliberately temporary). Could a RewriteRule do the trick?

Not a single one, no. The URLs *all* changed. There is not a single one that's the same. We may be able to do a single rewrite rule for most of the module-*.html URLs, but everything else -- and there is quite a lot of 'else' in the 2.5-and-earlier docs -- needs a better mapping. Feel free to send me that mapping

Perhaps it has already been suggested and rejected for some reason, but we could include the major/minor version numbers in the URLs. That would make it easier to rewrite old URLs, and I assume there will be 2.x and 3.x documentation available online for some period of time?

docs.python.org/lib/* could redirect to docs.python.org/2.5/lib/*

docs.pyhton.org/ (note no *) could redirect to docs.python.org/2.6/ and include a link to docs.python.org/3.0/

That way all of the old references (in Google and bookmarks) would still work.

Perhaps we should restore the old version of the files until this is resolved? Being redirected to the top landing page is a little disconcerting if you come to the site through a search engine and aren't familiar with the organization of the manual. For example, I went to look for the documentation on how slots work, and ended up at the top of the reference manual. The local search didn't work (no results), "slots" isn't in the index, and google still has the old URL.

Doug

_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

Georg Brandl | 2 Oct 14:17

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed

Doug Hellmann schrieb:

>> Not a single one, no. The URLs *all* changed. There is not a single
>> one that's the same. We may be able to do a single rewrite rule for
>> most of the module-*.html URLs, but everything else -- and there is
>> quite a lot of 'else' in the 2.5-and-earlier docs -- needs a better
>> mapping. Feel free to send me that mapping 
> 
> Perhaps it has already been suggested and rejected for some reason, but
> we could include the major/minor version numbers in the URLs.  That
> would make it easier to rewrite old URLs, and I assume there will be 2.x
> and 3.x documentation available online for some period of time?
> 
> docs.python.org/lib/* could redirect to docs.python.org/2.5/lib/*

That would be possible, but not sensible IMO -- it doesn't make people
update their links, instead keeps links to outdated documentation.

> docs.pyhton.org/ (note no *) could redirect to docs.python.org/2.6/ and
> include a link to docs.python.org/3.0/

We already have archived versioned docs at http://www.python.org/doc/X.Y.

> That way all of the old references (in Google and bookmarks) would still
> work.
> 
> Perhaps we should restore the old version of the files until this is
> resolved?  Being redirected to the top landing page is a little
> disconcerting if you come to the site through a search engine and aren't
> familiar with the organization of the manual.  For example, I went to
> look for the documentation on how slots work, and ended up at the top of
> the reference manual.  The local search didn't work (no results),
> "slots" isn't in the index, and google still has the old URL.

__slots__ is in the index (with the underscores). The local search shows me
__slots__ as the first result when I search for "__slots__" or "slots".

As for Google, I can only assume it will soon update its index.

Nevertheless, I will come up with a mapping for the old module URLs,
which is relatively easy.

Georg

--

-- 
Thus spake the Lord: Thou shalt indent with four spaces. No more, no less.
Four shall be the number of spaces thou shalt indent, and the number of thy
indenting shall be four. Eight shalt thou not indent, nor either indent thou
two, excepting that thou then proceed to four. Tabs are right out.

_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

Adam Olsen | 2 Oct 14:25

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed

On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 6:17 AM, Georg Brandl <g.brandl <at> gmx.net> wrote:
> Doug Hellmann schrieb:
>
>>> Not a single one, no. The URLs *all* changed. There is not a single
>>> one that's the same. We may be able to do a single rewrite rule for
>>> most of the module-*.html URLs, but everything else -- and there is
>>> quite a lot of 'else' in the 2.5-and-earlier docs -- needs a better
>>> mapping. Feel free to send me that mapping 
>>
>> Perhaps it has already been suggested and rejected for some reason, but
>> we could include the major/minor version numbers in the URLs.  That
>> would make it easier to rewrite old URLs, and I assume there will be 2.x
>> and 3.x documentation available online for some period of time?
>>
>> docs.python.org/lib/* could redirect to docs.python.org/2.5/lib/*
>
> That would be possible, but not sensible IMO -- it doesn't make people
> update their links, instead keeps links to outdated documentation.
>
>> docs.pyhton.org/ (note no *) could redirect to docs.python.org/2.6/ and
>> include a link to docs.python.org/3.0/
>
> We already have archived versioned docs at http://www.python.org/doc/X.Y.

Why not use versioned URLs, but with a  link at the top of old pages
saying they're outdated, linking to the new version.  Either way they
should update their links, but this way you don't shoot them in the
foot to do it.

Breaking old links should be avoided if at all possible.

--

-- 
Adam Olsen, aka Rhamphoryncus
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

Georg Brandl | 2 Oct 14:34

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed

Adam Olsen schrieb:
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 6:17 AM, Georg Brandl <g.brandl <at> gmx.net> wrote:
>> Doug Hellmann schrieb:
>>
>>>> Not a single one, no. The URLs *all* changed. There is not a single
>>>> one that's the same. We may be able to do a single rewrite rule for
>>>> most of the module-*.html URLs, but everything else -- and there is
>>>> quite a lot of 'else' in the 2.5-and-earlier docs -- needs a better
>>>> mapping. Feel free to send me that mapping 
>>>
>>> Perhaps it has already been suggested and rejected for some reason, but
>>> we could include the major/minor version numbers in the URLs.  That
>>> would make it easier to rewrite old URLs, and I assume there will be 2.x
>>> and 3.x documentation available online for some period of time?
>>>
>>> docs.python.org/lib/* could redirect to docs.python.org/2.5/lib/*
>>
>> That would be possible, but not sensible IMO -- it doesn't make people
>> update their links, instead keeps links to outdated documentation.
>>
>>> docs.pyhton.org/ (note no *) could redirect to docs.python.org/2.6/ and
>>> include a link to docs.python.org/3.0/
>>
>> We already have archived versioned docs at http://www.python.org/doc/X.Y.
> 
> Why not use versioned URLs, but with a  link at the top of old pages
> saying they're outdated, linking to the new version.  Either way they
> should update their links, but this way you don't shoot them in the
> foot to do it.

If linking to the new version could be done easily, we could as well directly
redirect. The problem is that having that mapping in the first place is hard.

Georg

--

-- 
Thus spake the Lord: Thou shalt indent with four spaces. No more, no less.
Four shall be the number of spaces thou shalt indent, and the number of thy
indenting shall be four. Eight shalt thou not indent, nor either indent thou
two, excepting that thou then proceed to four. Tabs are right out.

_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

Doug Hellmann | 2 Oct 14:46

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed

On Oct 2, 2008, at 8:34 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:

>
> If linking to the new version could be done easily, we could as well  
> directly
> redirect. The problem is that having that mapping in the first place  
> is hard.

I was looking for the easy route.  If the layout of the new docs  
changed completely, anything that starts with the old abbreviations (/ 
lib/, /tut/, /ref/, etc.) could just go over to the 2.5.2 docs,  
right?  You don't need to map every sub-section to its new URL unless  
you feel really strongly that links to pages in the old organization  
should point to the new location.

Doug

_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

Tres Seaver | 2 Oct 15:14

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed


Georg Brandl wrote:
> Adam Olsen schrieb:
>> On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 6:17 AM, Georg Brandl <g.brandl <at> gmx.net> wrote:
>>> Doug Hellmann schrieb:
>>>
>>>>> Not a single one, no. The URLs *all* changed. There is not a single
>>>>> one that's the same. We may be able to do a single rewrite rule for
>>>>> most of the module-*.html URLs, but everything else -- and there is
>>>>> quite a lot of 'else' in the 2.5-and-earlier docs -- needs a better
>>>>> mapping. Feel free to send me that mapping 
>>>> Perhaps it has already been suggested and rejected for some reason, but
>>>> we could include the major/minor version numbers in the URLs.  That
>>>> would make it easier to rewrite old URLs, and I assume there will be 2.x
>>>> and 3.x documentation available online for some period of time?
>>>>
>>>> docs.python.org/lib/* could redirect to docs.python.org/2.5/lib/*
>>> That would be possible, but not sensible IMO -- it doesn't make people
>>> update their links, instead keeps links to outdated documentation.
>>>
>>>> docs.pyhton.org/ (note no *) could redirect to docs.python.org/2.6/ and
>>>> include a link to docs.python.org/3.0/
>>> We already have archived versioned docs at http://www.python.org/doc/X.Y.
>> Why not use versioned URLs, but with a  link at the top of old pages
>> saying they're outdated, linking to the new version.  Either way they
>> should update their links, but this way you don't shoot them in the
>> foot to do it.
> 
> If linking to the new version could be done easily, we could as well directly
> redirect. The problem is that having that mapping in the first place is hard.

Why would you remove the old docs (ones with 2.5 in the URL)?  They
still provide value for folks who can't yet move to 2.6 / 3.0;  forcibly
redirecting a versioned URL to "current" can't possibley be sane.

Tres.
--
===================================================================
Tres Seaver          +1 540-429-0999          tseaver <at> palladion.com
Palladion Software   "Excellence by Design"    http://palladion.com

Georg Brandl | 2 Oct 15:19

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed

Tres Seaver schrieb:
> Georg Brandl wrote:

>>>>> docs.pyhton.org/ (note no *) could redirect to docs.python.org/2.6/ and
>>>>> include a link to docs.python.org/3.0/
>>>> We already have archived versioned docs at http://www.python.org/doc/X.Y.
>>> Why not use versioned URLs, but with a  link at the top of old pages
>>> saying they're outdated, linking to the new version.  Either way they
>>> should update their links, but this way you don't shoot them in the
>>> foot to do it.
> 
>> If linking to the new version could be done easily, we could as well directly
>> redirect. The problem is that having that mapping in the first place is hard.
> 
> Why would you remove the old docs (ones with 2.5 in the URL)?  They
> still provide value for folks who can't yet move to 2.6 / 3.0;  forcibly
> redirecting a versioned URL to "current" can't possibley be sane.

That's true; it's also not what I meant. The versioned docs will of course
always stay there. The question is what to do for URLs that refer to
docs.python.org, but with old filenames.

Georg

--

-- 
Thus spake the Lord: Thou shalt indent with four spaces. No more, no less.
Four shall be the number of spaces thou shalt indent, and the number of thy
indenting shall be four. Eight shalt thou not indent, nor either indent thou
two, excepting that thou then proceed to four. Tabs are right out.

_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

Nick Coghlan | 2 Oct 15:38

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed

Georg Brandl wrote:
> That's true; it's also not what I meant. The versioned docs will of course
> always stay there. The question is what to do for URLs that refer to
> docs.python.org, but with old filenames.

I still like the idea of redirecting such URLs to the old 2.5.2 docs as
a short-term fix, with a more complex remapping to the appropriate 2.6
files when it is available.

(Whether or not the first part is worth doing obviously depends on how
much time you expect the second part to take).

Cheers,
Nick.

--

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan <at> gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
            http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

"Martin v. =?iso-8859-1?q?L=F6wis=22?= | 2 Oct 22:13

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed

> Why not use versioned URLs, but with a  link at the top of old pages
> saying they're outdated, linking to the new version.  Either way they
> should update their links, but this way you don't shoot them in the
> foot to do it.

Wouldn't that require changes to the old pages?

Regards,
Martin
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

Adam Olsen | 2 Oct 22:31

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed

On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 2:13 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <martin <at> v.loewis.de> wrote:
>> Why not use versioned URLs, but with a  link at the top of old pages
>> saying they're outdated, linking to the new version.  Either way they
>> should update their links, but this way you don't shoot them in the
>> foot to do it.
>
> Wouldn't that require changes to the old pages?

Hopefully just to whatever common templating they're using.  I'm not
familiar with how they're generated though.

--

-- 
Adam Olsen, aka Rhamphoryncus
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

"Martin v. =?iso-8859-1?q?L=F6wis=22?= | 2 Oct 22:36

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed

>> Wouldn't that require changes to the old pages?
> 
> Hopefully just to whatever common templating they're using.  I'm not
> familiar with how they're generated though.

That's exactly the problem: they are generated. I don't think it's
feasible to regenerate them, and still expect the output to be the
same. Also, I don't think the generator supports templating in the
way you might expect it to. To be specific, it's latex2html.

Regards,
Martin

_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

Nick Coghlan | 2 Oct 14:33

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed

Georg Brandl wrote:
> Nevertheless, I will come up with a mapping for the old module URLs,
> which is relatively easy.

Best solution of all :)

I was actually only suggesting redirecting to the old docs until such a
mapping was available - but if that mapping will be available fairly
soon, then bumping old links up to the base URL for a day or two won't
be too bad.

Cheers,
Nick.

--

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan <at> gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
            http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

Doug Hellmann | 2 Oct 14:35

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed


On Oct 2, 2008, at 8:17 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:

> Doug Hellmann schrieb:
>
>>> Not a single one, no. The URLs *all* changed. There is not a single
>>> one that's the same. We may be able to do a single rewrite rule for
>>> most of the module-*.html URLs, but everything else -- and there is
>>> quite a lot of 'else' in the 2.5-and-earlier docs -- needs a better
>>> mapping. Feel free to send me that mapping 
>>
>> Perhaps it has already been suggested and rejected for some reason,  
>> but
>> we could include the major/minor version numbers in the URLs.  That
>> would make it easier to rewrite old URLs, and I assume there will  
>> be 2.x
>> and 3.x documentation available online for some period of time?
>>
>> docs.python.org/lib/* could redirect to docs.python.org/2.5/lib/*
>
> That would be possible, but not sensible IMO -- it doesn't make people
> update their links, instead keeps links to outdated documentation.

The documentation isn't outdated if you're still running Python 2.5,  
as a lot of people will be.  Not everyone gets to upgrade right away  
when there's a new release.  For example, the product we build at work  
depends on 2.5 and we don't have time in our schedule to upgrade right  
away.  It may be several months before we do.

>> docs.pyhton.org/ (note no *) could redirect to docs.python.org/2.6/  
>> and
>> include a link to docs.python.org/3.0/
>
> We already have archived versioned docs at http://www.python.org/doc/X.Y 
> .

Great, so we can just redirect the old links over there.  If you can  
make them point to the correct form of the new docs, that would be  
even better, but at least sending them to the old docs means they  
point to *something* useful.

>> That way all of the old references (in Google and bookmarks) would  
>> still
>> work.
>>
>> Perhaps we should restore the old version of the files until this is
>> resolved?  Being redirected to the top landing page is a little
>> disconcerting if you come to the site through a search engine and  
>> aren't
>> familiar with the organization of the manual.  For example, I went to
>> look for the documentation on how slots work, and ended up at the  
>> top of
>> the reference manual.  The local search didn't work (no results),
>> "slots" isn't in the index, and google still has the old URL.
>
> __slots__ is in the index (with the underscores). The local search  
> shows me
> __slots__ as the first result when I search for "__slots__" or  
> "slots".

OK, searching for "slots" at http://docs.python.org found several  
results this time.  I don't know why it would have given me no results  
the last time, but I found what I needed.

Doug

_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

Nick Coghlan | 2 Oct 14:18

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed

Doug Hellmann wrote:
> Perhaps it has already been suggested and rejected for some reason, but
> we could include the major/minor version numbers in the URLs.  That
> would make it easier to rewrite old URLs, and I assume there will be 2.x
> and 3.x documentation available online for some period of time?

The old doc directories are already kept around (all the way back to 1.4
in fact: http://www.python.org/doc/1.4/)

As a quick fix for the old links, a rewrite rule to map such links to
the 2.5 docs seems like a very good idea to me. Since old URLs all use
abbreviations in the directory name (tut, lib, mac, ref, ext, api, doc,
inst, dist), it should be straightforward to redirect them without
affecting the links to the new docs (tutorial, using, reference, howto,
extending, c-api, install, distutils, documenting).

> Perhaps we should restore the old version of the files until this is
> resolved?  Being redirected to the top landing page is a little
> disconcerting if you come to the site through a search engine and aren't
> familiar with the organization of the manual.

A redirect rule to the 2.5.2 docs for the old naming scheme is probably
a better short-term solution.

>  For example, I went to
> look for the documentation on how slots work, and ended up at the top of
> the reference manual.  The local search didn't work (no results),
> "slots" isn't in the index, and google still has the old URL.

The quick search is actually working for me these days (it wasn't for a
while when the new docs were still in development). (e.g. the first hit
I get when searching for "slots" now is
http://www.python.org/doc/2.6/reference/datamodel.html?highlight=slots#__slots__)

I believe it's a Javascript based search though, so there may be issues
with browser compatibility (or user's with JS disabled).

Cheers,
Nick.

--

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan <at> gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
            http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

skip | 2 Oct 15:51

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed


    Nick> The old doc directories are already kept around (all the way back
    Nick> to 1.4 in fact: http://www.python.org/doc/1.4/)

    Nick> As a quick fix for the old links, a rewrite rule to map such links
    Nick> to the 2.5 docs seems like a very good idea to me. Since old URLs
    Nick> all use abbreviations in the directory name (tut, lib, mac, ref,
    Nick> ext, api, doc, inst, dist), it should be straightforward to
    Nick> redirect them without affecting the links to the new docs
    Nick> (tutorial, using, reference, howto, extending, c-api, install,
    Nick> distutils, documenting).

Yes, we should probably still get the top-level links redirected to the new
docs though.  The 2.5 tutorial is probably going to get stale over time
while the 2.6 version will be updated at least until 2.7 is released.

Skip
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

Thomas Wouters | 2 Oct 16:41

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed

On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 15:51, <skip <at> pobox.com> wrote:

Nick> The old doc directories are already kept around (all the way back
Nick> to 1.4 in fact: http://www.python.org/doc/1.4/)

Nick> As a quick fix for the old links, a rewrite rule to map such links
Nick> to the 2.5 docs seems like a very good idea to me. Since old URLs
Nick> all use abbreviations in the directory name (tut, lib, mac, ref,
Nick> ext, api, doc, inst, dist), it should be straightforward to
Nick> redirect them without affecting the links to the new docs
Nick> (tutorial, using, reference, howto, extending, c-api, install,
Nick> distutils, documenting).

Yes, we should probably still get the top-level links redirected to the new
docs though. The 2.5 tutorial is probably going to get stale over time
while the 2.6 version will be updated at least until 2.7 is released.

After discussing on #python-dev (briefly), I made the toplevel directories refer to the new, 2.6 toplevel directories, but deeper URLs in the old directories redirect to www.python.org/doc/2.5.2/. I still think this is the wrong approach, especially in the long term: it means people who just follow old documentation links will not see the new results, and search engines will not realize the pages are effectively stale.

--
Thomas Wouters <thomas <at> python.org>

Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!

_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

Georg Brandl | 2 Oct 22:38

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed

Thomas Wouters schrieb:

> After discussing on #python-dev (briefly), I made the toplevel
> directories refer to the new, 2.6 toplevel directories, but deeper URLs
> in the old directories redirect to www.python.org/doc/2.5.2/
> <http://www.python.org/doc/2.5.2/>. I still think this is the wrong
> approach, especially in the long term: it means people who just follow
> old documentation links will not see the new results, and search engines
> will not realize the pages are effectively stale.

I'll work on a more thorough redirection in about two weeks' time.

Georg

--

-- 
Thus spake the Lord: Thou shalt indent with four spaces. No more, no less.
Four shall be the number of spaces thou shalt indent, and the number of thy
indenting shall be four. Eight shalt thou not indent, nor either indent thou
two, excepting that thou then proceed to four. Tabs are right out.

_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

Nick Coghlan | 2 Oct 23:49

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed

Thomas Wouters wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 15:51, <skip <at> pobox.com <mailto:skip <at> pobox.com>>
> wrote:
> 
> 
>        Nick> The old doc directories are already kept around (all the
>     way back
>        Nick> to 1.4 in fact: http://www.python.org/doc/1.4/)
> 
>        Nick> As a quick fix for the old links, a rewrite rule to map
>     such links
>        Nick> to the 2.5 docs seems like a very good idea to me. Since
>     old URLs
>        Nick> all use abbreviations in the directory name (tut, lib, mac,
>     ref,
>        Nick> ext, api, doc, inst, dist), it should be straightforward to
>        Nick> redirect them without affecting the links to the new docs
>        Nick> (tutorial, using, reference, howto, extending, c-api, install,
>        Nick> distutils, documenting).
> 
>     Yes, we should probably still get the top-level links redirected to
>     the new
>     docs though.  The 2.5 tutorial is probably going to get stale over time
>     while the 2.6 version will be updated at least until 2.7 is released.
> 
> 
> After discussing on #python-dev (briefly), I made the toplevel
> directories refer to the new, 2.6 toplevel directories, but deeper URLs
> in the old directories redirect to www.python.org/doc/2.5.2/
> <http://www.python.org/doc/2.5.2/>. I still think this is the wrong
> approach, especially in the long term: it means people who just follow
> old documentation links will not see the new results, and search engines
> will not realize the pages are effectively stale.

Agreed, but I think it's a better near-term solution than dumping deep
links back at the top of the relevant document (it always annoys me when
web sites do that).

Long term, remapping even the deep links to the appropriate part of the
new docs should hopefully be possible.

For the search engine issue, is there any way we can tell robots to
ignore the rewrite rules so they see the broken links? (although even
that may not be ideal, since what we really want is to tell the robot
the link is broken, and provide the new alternative)

Cheers,
Nick.

--

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan <at> gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
            http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

engelbert gruber | 15 Oct 17:30

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed

On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 11:49 PM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan <at> gmail.com> wrote:

> Long term, remapping even the deep links to the appropriate part of the
> new docs should hopefully be possible.
>
> For the search engine issue, is there any way we can tell robots to
> ignore the rewrite rules so they see the broken links? (although even
> that may not be ideal, since what we really want is to tell the robot
> the link is broken, and provide the new alternative)

wouldnt that be a situation to use hTTP 301/permanently moved headers

all the best
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

Antoine Pitrou | 2 Oct 13:35

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed


> 
> Not a single one, no. The URLs *all* changed. There is not a single
> one that's the same. We may be able to do a single rewrite rule for
> most of the module-*.html URLs, but everything else -- and there is
> quite a lot of 'else' in the 2.5-and-earlier docs -- needs a better
> mapping. Feel free to send me that mapping 

My bad. I thought it was just a matter of doing a generic substitution.
Well, then we'll have to live with it I suppose :)

Regards

Antoine.

_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

skip | 2 Oct 15:47

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed

    >> Not a single one, no. The URLs *all* changed. There is not a single
    >> one that's the same. We may be able to do a single rewrite rule for
    >> most of the module-*.html URLs, but everything else -- and there is
    >> quite a lot of 'else' in the 2.5-and-earlier docs -- needs a better
    >> mapping. Feel free to send me that mapping 

    Antoine> My bad. I thought it was just a matter of doing a generic
    Antoine> substitution.  Well, then we'll have to live with it I suppose
    Antoine> :)

Unfortunately, without some mapping the search engines will toss everything
out.  While they will eventually get around to fetching
http://docs.python.org/ and traversing the tree of pages, but that might
take awhile.  I won't have time for the next day or two to scan the docs
error log, but if I can come up with a list of the ten most frequent
failures I suspect we can easily define RewriteRule directives for them.

Skip
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

Thomas Wouters | 2 Oct 15:51

www.python.org/doc and docs.python.org hotfixed

On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 15:47, <skip <at> pobox.com> wrote:

>> Not a single one, no. The URLs *all* changed. There is not a single
>> one that's the same. We may be able to do a single rewrite rule for
>> most of the module-*.html URLs, but everything else -- and there is
>> quite a lot of 'else' in the 2.5-and-earlier docs -- needs a better
>> mapping. Feel free to send me that mapping

Antoine> My bad. I thought it was just a matter of doing a generic
Antoine> substitution. Well, then we'll have to live with it I suppose
Antoine> :)

Unfortunately, without some mapping the search engines will toss everything
out. While they will eventually get around to fetching
http://docs.python.org/ and traversing the tree of pages, but that might
take awhile. I won't have time for the next day or two to scan the docs
error log, but if I can come up with a list of the ten most frequent
failures I suspect we can easily define RewriteRule directives for them.

To be sure, the URLs *are* mapped. They're just mapped to something other than they were mapped to before -- because those pages no longer exist for the 'current version' of the documentation. Pages covering the same or nearly the same thing may exist in some cases, but not in others. We can do a best-effort to redirect the old URLs to something covering the same information, or we can wait a few days to let search engines realize the URLs changed, and let everyone else deal with searching a little further for the information they had bookmarked.

--
Thomas Wouters <thomas <at> python.org>

Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!

_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org

Return

Return to gmane.comp.python.devel.

Advertisement

Search Archive

Language

Change language

Options

Current view: Threads only / Showing whole messages / Not hiding cited text.
Change to All messages, shortened messages, or hide cited text.

Post a message
NNTP Newsgroup
Classic Gmane web interface
XML

XML

RSS Feed
List Information

About Gmane