You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@forrest.apache.org by Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org> on 2005/05/05 16:52:55 UTC
Forrest sites google ranking
I just noticed that the changes in the Forrest site have resulted in a
complete loss of our google ranking. That is we currently have a rank of
"n/a". Prior to the redirects we had a very healthy 7.
Since our redirect will change every time we release a new version this
loss of ranking will happen with each release.
Of course, the Google engine still has the old indexes and these links
will be redirected when the user arrives. My concern is that over time
we will suffer because of this.
I think we need to change the website so that we have an index.html page
that is consitent through all releases. However, I do not claim to fully
understand the Google ranking algorithm, so please correct me if I am wrong.
Ross
Re: Forrest sites google ranking
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org>.
David Crossley wrote:
> Ross Gardler wrote:
>
>>I just noticed that the changes in the Forrest site have resulted in a
>>complete loss of our google ranking. That is we currently have a rank of
>>"n/a". Prior to the redirects we had a very healthy 7.
>
>
> Would you please explain how you find this "ranking".
https://addons.update.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php?application=firefox&id=262
Ross
Re: Forrest sites google ranking
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>.
Ross Gardler wrote:
> I just noticed that the changes in the Forrest site have resulted in a
> complete loss of our google ranking. That is we currently have a rank of
> "n/a". Prior to the redirects we had a very healthy 7.
Would you please explain how you find this "ranking".
--David
Re: Forrest sites google ranking
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org>.
David Crossley wrote:
> Ross Gardler wrote:
>
>>David Crossley wrote:
>>
>>>Ross Gardler wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I think we need to change the website so that we have an index.html page
>>>>that is consitent through all releases. However, I do not claim to fully
>>>>understand the Google ranking algorithm, so please correct me if I am
>>>>wrong.
...
> Instead i have used a different mechanism. On the server there is now
> a 'svn co' of the 0.6 docs into the top-level of our website.
> When it comes time for the 0.7 release, we just need to remove them
> and checkout the 0.7 docs in their place.
Sounds just fine.
> Sorry for wrecking our Google rank.
Well we were all here when this solution was discussed, so I guess we
are all sorry, but there is good new...
The good news is that with your new solution our home page has actually
gone *up* in the rankings. We are now ranked at 8, which is pretty damn
high (it's appears to be a logarithmic scale from 0 to 10, although
Google do not publish their exact formula).
Ross
Re: Forrest sites google ranking
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>.
Ross Gardler wrote:
> David Crossley wrote:
> >Ross Gardler wrote:
> >
> >>I think we need to change the website so that we have an index.html page
> >>that is consitent through all releases. However, I do not claim to fully
> >>understand the Google ranking algorithm, so please correct me if I am
> >>wrong.
> >
> >I wonder if we just need to use "AliasMatch" directives
> >for apache httpd rather than the RedirectMatch that we are
> >currently using.
>
> I'm no httpd whizz, nor google whizz for that matter, but if the
> AliasMatch means that the URL still appears, in the client, as
> http://forrest.apache.org then I think this will work.
No expert either, but i have found a better way.
That httpd config change is not under our control, so we need to
send a patch to ASF infra every time we want to change something.
That would introduce a delay at release time. Also infra is asking
the PMCs to do as much work as possible.
Instead i have used a different mechanism. On the server there is now
a 'svn co' of the 0.6 docs into the top-level of our website.
When it comes time for the 0.7 release, we just need to remove them
and checkout the 0.7 docs in their place.
There are separate 'svn co' of each set of docs at /0.6/ and /0.7/
Sorry for wrecking our Google rank.
--David
Re: Forrest sites google ranking
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org>.
David Crossley wrote:
> Ross Gardler wrote:
>
>>I just noticed that the changes in the Forrest site have resulted in a
>>complete loss of our google ranking. That is we currently have a rank of
>>"n/a". Prior to the redirects we had a very healthy 7.
>>
>>Since our redirect will change every time we release a new version this
>>loss of ranking will happen with each release.
>>
>>Of course, the Google engine still has the old indexes and these links
>>will be redirected when the user arrives. My concern is that over time
>>we will suffer because of this.
>>
>>I think we need to change the website so that we have an index.html page
>>that is consitent through all releases. However, I do not claim to fully
>>understand the Google ranking algorithm, so please correct me if I am wrong.
>
>
> I wonder if we just need to use "AliasMatch" directives
> for apache httpd rather than the RedirectMatch that we are
> currently using.
I'm no httpd whizz, nor google whizz for that matter, but if the
AliasMatch means that the URL still appears, in the client, as
http://forrest.apache.org then I think this will work.
Ross
Re: Forrest sites google ranking
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>.
Ross Gardler wrote:
> I just noticed that the changes in the Forrest site have resulted in a
> complete loss of our google ranking. That is we currently have a rank of
> "n/a". Prior to the redirects we had a very healthy 7.
>
> Since our redirect will change every time we release a new version this
> loss of ranking will happen with each release.
>
> Of course, the Google engine still has the old indexes and these links
> will be redirected when the user arrives. My concern is that over time
> we will suffer because of this.
>
> I think we need to change the website so that we have an index.html page
> that is consitent through all releases. However, I do not claim to fully
> understand the Google ranking algorithm, so please correct me if I am wrong.
I wonder if we just need to use "AliasMatch" directives
for apache httpd rather than the RedirectMatch that we are
currently using.
--David