You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to docs@httpd.apache.org by Paul Querna <ch...@force-elite.com> on 2005/07/19 18:55:17 UTC
Moving Docs URLs
We are going to move the URLs for the documentation on the website.
Content:
/docs/ -> /docs/1.3/
/docs-2.0/ -> /docs/2.0/
/docs-2.1/ -> /docs/2.1/
Now, when a user requests /docs/mod/mod_rewrite.html for example, which
document should they be served?
We decided to create a cgi, and this cgi will list the versions available.
Example URL:
http://httpd.zones.apache.org:8080/docs/mod/core.html.en
We need to write some better text in the CGI, and a new index page for
/docs/, perhaps the contents of /docs-project/ could even go there.
Any suggestions?
-Paul
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Moving Docs URLs
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
Astrid Keßler wrote:
> Not sure, but didn't we had a similar discussion some time ago? I can't
> find it now. :/
Yes, we've had this conversation a number of times, and each time agreed
(or at least majority) that it was a good idea.
> Like Joshua I am against changing the URLs. We have docs-2.0 and docs-2.1
> they are really fine. No need to change them.
Well, having a dozen top-level documentation directories in version
2.12.0 will be kind of annoying, I think.
> I'm a litte bit unhappy only with 1.3 and could live with a change to
> docs-1.3. This would fit the namespace and would give us the possibility
> to add some extra information at /docs. We do not need a script to lead
> the people to the new urls. httpd itself can do this.
>
> The only advantage, a CGI-script would have, is that it could do some
> search over all doc versions and offer choices. I think, this is
> something, google (or some other search engine) can do as well. Let's
> use the existing resources.
Yes. That's what the script does. That's why it's a script and not just
a series of rewrite rules. It is doing translations (like mod_imap to
mod_imagemap) as well as detecting modules that no longer exist
(mod_auth_db).
--Rich
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Moving Docs URLs
Posted by Astrid Keßler <ke...@kess-net.de>.
> Joshua Slive wrote:
> Erik Abele wrote:
>>> The point of the cgi script is to provide not a redirect, but another
>>> page
>>> (with status 300 so far), which points to all the different versions.
>>
>>
>> Yeah, as Paul noted for /docs/ - but what's about /docs-2.(0|1)/ - same
>> CGI script? Fine.
>>> People can update their bookmarks accordingly.
> Ugh. Please just send the 2.x stuff directly where it belongs. There
> is certainly no ambiguity there that needs resolving.
> I'm also -0.666 on the whole CGI script idea. I love stable URLs. I
> hate people making me go through all my pages to change links just
> because they wanted prettier-looking URLs. Do you realize how many
> thousands of links we are talking about? And note also that this will
> completely mess up any links with anchors (mod/core.html#AccessFilename).
> I would much prefer a permanent redirect for all three. If you really
> believe that many people are unintentionally winding up in the 1.3 docs
> when they want to be in the 2.0 docs, then add a message to the top of
> the 1.3 docs pages.
Not sure, but didn't we had a similar discussion some time ago? I can't
find it now. :/
Like Joshua I am against changing the URLs. We have docs-2.0 and docs-2.1
they are really fine. No need to change them.
I'm a litte bit unhappy only with 1.3 and could live with a change to
docs-1.3. This would fit the namespace and would give us the possibility
to add some extra information at /docs. We do not need a script to lead
the people to the new urls. httpd itself can do this.
The only advantage, a CGI-script would have, is that it could do some
search over all doc versions and offer choices. I think, this is
something, google (or some other search engine) can do as well. Let's
use the existing resources.
Kess
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Moving Docs URLs
Posted by Joshua Slive <jo...@slive.ca>.
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> At 05:24 AM 7/20/2005, Rich Bowen wrote:
>
>> Perhaps I'm missing what you mean by "remapping /docs-1.3/". From what
>> to where?
>
> from it's old /docs/ home to /docs-1.3/ ... I'm thinking that the
> /docs/1.3/, /docs/2.0/ etc isn't that useful, as mentioned by other
> posters.
FWIW, I have no particular problem with moving stuff under /docs/2.0/,
etc, as long as there are permanent Redirects in place to handle old
links. I do find it slightly more esthetically pleasing.
Joshua.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Moving Docs URLs
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> At 05:24 AM 7/20/2005, Rich Bowen wrote:
>
>
>>Perhaps I'm missing what you mean by "remapping /docs-1.3/". From what
>>to where?
>
>
> from it's old /docs/ home to /docs-1.3/ ... I'm thinking that the
> /docs/1.3/, /docs/2.0/ etc isn't that useful, as mentioned by other
> posters.
Ok. I find it to be more forward-thinking. We've got to think ahead 20
versions if we want to avoid a problem happening later, which will be
harder to solve at that point.
Of course, we could also take it to a greater extreme and do /docs/2/0
and /docs/2/2 but I think that would be going too far the other direction.
--Rich
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Moving Docs URLs
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
At 05:24 AM 7/20/2005, Rich Bowen wrote:
>Perhaps I'm missing what you mean by "remapping /docs-1.3/". From what
>to where?
from it's old /docs/ home to /docs-1.3/ ... I'm thinking that the
/docs/1.3/, /docs/2.0/ etc isn't that useful, as mentioned by other
posters.
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Moving Docs URLs
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
> exactly! +1 for remapping /docs-1.3/, but use Apache httpd module
> features; let's not throw work on our infrastructure.
>
> Remember this aught to map for proxies as well. Although docs
> aren't widely mirrored, we know our proxy admin friends aren't
> keen on running cgi's - they are happy to serve our pages.
> Straightforward .htaccess syntax they probably would apply.
Well, yes, presumably with a sufficiently complex set of rewriterules we
could make the same thing happen. It would require a significant number
of rules to accomplish this. They would need to be able to detect
modules that have disappeared or changed their name.
Perhaps I'm missing what you mean by "remapping /docs-1.3/". From what
to where?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Moving Docs URLs
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
At 12:48 PM 7/19/2005, Joshua Slive wrote:
>Erik Abele wrote:
>>>The point of the cgi script is to provide not a redirect, but another page
>>>(with status 300 so far), which points to all the different versions.
>>
>>Ugh. Please just send the 2.x stuff directly where it belongs. There is certainly no ambiguity there that needs resolving.
>
>I'm also -0.666 on the whole CGI script idea.
I'll vote -1 on the CGI idea; minotaur is overtaxed enough(!)...
At 02:13 PM 7/19/2005, Astrid Keßler wrote:
>I'm a litte bit unhappy only with 1.3 and could live with a change to
>docs-1.3. This would fit the namespace and would give us the possibility
>to add some extra information at /docs. We do not need a script to lead
>the people to the new urls. httpd itself can do this.
exactly! +1 for remapping /docs-1.3/, but use Apache httpd module
features; let's not throw work on our infrastructure.
Remember this aught to map for proxies as well. Although docs
aren't widely mirrored, we know our proxy admin friends aren't
keen on running cgi's - they are happy to serve our pages.
Straightforward .htaccess syntax they probably would apply.
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Moving Docs URLs
Posted by Joshua Slive <jo...@slive.ca>.
Erik Abele wrote:
>> The point of the cgi script is to provide not a redirect, but another
>> page
>> (with status 300 so far), which points to all the different versions.
>
>
> Yeah, as Paul noted for /docs/ - but what's about /docs-2.(0|1)/ - same
> CGI script? Fine.
>> People can update their bookmarks accordingly.
Ugh. Please just send the 2.x stuff directly where it belongs. There
is certainly no ambiguity there that needs resolving.
I'm also -0.666 on the whole CGI script idea. I love stable URLs. I
hate people making me go through all my pages to change links just
because they wanted prettier-looking URLs. Do you realize how many
thousands of links we are talking about? And note also that this will
completely mess up any links with anchors (mod/core.html#AccessFilename).
I would much prefer a permanent redirect for all three. If you really
believe that many people are unintentionally winding up in the 1.3 docs
when they want to be in the 2.0 docs, then add a message to the top of
the 1.3 docs pages.
Joshua.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Moving Docs URLs
Posted by Erik Abele <er...@codefaktor.de>.
On 19.07.2005, at 19:12, André Malo wrote:
> * Erik Abele wrote:
>
>> On 19.07.2005, at 18:55, Paul Querna wrote:
>>
>>> We are going to move the URLs for the documentation on the website.
>>>
>>> Content:
>>> /docs/ -> /docs/1.3/
>>> /docs-2.0/ -> /docs/2.0/
>>> /docs-2.1/ -> /docs/2.1/
>>
>> Okay, but please keep a redirect around for the old URLs.
>
> The point of the cgi script is to provide not a redirect, but
> another page
> (with status 300 so far), which points to all the different versions.
Yeah, as Paul noted for /docs/ - but what's about /docs-2.(0|1)/ -
same CGI script? Fine.
> People can update their bookmarks accordingly.
Indeed.
> Anyway, I think, static files may serve for the same purpose
> (thinking about
> mod_asis). We may even generate them by the docs build process.
Me doesn't care as long as it works reliably.
>> Yep, it always bugged me that all this can't be found in one
>> consistent URL-space; so I'm +1 on moving the content of /docs-
>> project/ to /docs/ and redirecting from the old URLs to the new ones.
>> Just my 2c...
>
> docs/project/ ?
>
> I don't have a strong opinion about this one. +-0 ;-)
Fine with me but what do we serve for /docs/ then?
Cheers,
Erik
Re: Moving Docs URLs
Posted by André Malo <nd...@perlig.de>.
* Erik Abele wrote:
> On 19.07.2005, at 18:55, Paul Querna wrote:
> > We are going to move the URLs for the documentation on the website.
> >
> > Content:
> > /docs/ -> /docs/1.3/
> > /docs-2.0/ -> /docs/2.0/
> > /docs-2.1/ -> /docs/2.1/
>
> Okay, but please keep a redirect around for the old URLs.
The point of the cgi script is to provide not a redirect, but another page
(with status 300 so far), which points to all the different versions.
People can update their bookmarks accordingly.
Anyway, I think, static files may serve for the same purpose (thinking about
mod_asis). We may even generate them by the docs build process.
> Yep, it always bugged me that all this can't be found in one
> consistent URL-space; so I'm +1 on moving the content of /docs-
> project/ to /docs/ and redirecting from the old URLs to the new ones.
> Just my 2c...
docs/project/ ?
I don't have a strong opinion about this one. +-0 ;-)
nd
--
s;.*;aaaaaoaaaoaaaaooooaaoaaaomaaaa:a:alataa:aaoat:a:a:a
maoaa:a:laoata:a:oia:a:o:a:m:a:o:alaoooat:aaool:aaoaa
matooololaaatoto:aaa:o:a:o:m;;s:\s:\::g;y;mailto:;
\40\51/\134\137|ndparker <nd...@perlig.de>;;print;
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Moving Docs URLs
Posted by Erik Abele <er...@codefaktor.de>.
On 19.07.2005, at 18:55, Paul Querna wrote:
> We are going to move the URLs for the documentation on the website.
>
> Content:
> /docs/ -> /docs/1.3/
> /docs-2.0/ -> /docs/2.0/
> /docs-2.1/ -> /docs/2.1/
Okay, but please keep a redirect around for the old URLs.
> Now, when a user requests /docs/mod/mod_rewrite.html for example,
> which
> document should they be served?
>
> We decided to create a cgi, and this cgi will list the versions
> available.
>
> Example URL:
> http://httpd.zones.apache.org:8080/docs/mod/core.html.en
>
> We need to write some better text in the CGI, and a new index page for
> /docs/, perhaps the contents of /docs-project/ could even go there.
Yep, it always bugged me that all this can't be found in one
consistent URL-space; so I'm +1 on moving the content of /docs-
project/ to /docs/ and redirecting from the old URLs to the new ones.
Just my 2c...
Cheers,
Erik