On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 9:55 AM Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> wrote:
> For changed URLs, will previous URLs be mapped to avoid broken external > links? > I believe the answer is yes from Nam's response "For now, we keep the old URLs working in terms of redirecting them". I very much agree that this is very important and should work for all existing urls. > > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 9:34 AM Aizhamal Nurmamat kyzy < > aizha...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> To give a little more context regarding the URLs, the date should still >> appear on the blog post, but not on the URL. >> For example, we'd have: >> >> https://beam.apache.org/beam/python/sdk/2016/02/25/python-sdk-now-public.html >> become https://beam.apache.org/blog/dataflow-python-sdk-is-now-public/. >> > I am not a content marketer. IMO, this is a good change. In the past, a few times, we edited dates on posts (e.g. a release date was entered incorrectly) and we had to either have a mismatch between dates in the url and the date in the blog, or change the url. This change simplifies, by having date only in place (in content metadata). > >> The blog posts would have a small header showing the title, author and >> publish date. But the URL would not have it. >> Thoughts? >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 9:23 AM Nam Bui <nam....@polidea.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> @altay: Hey hey. Yeah, I didn't expect the baseUrl of staging version is >>> "http://apache-beam-website-pull-requests.storage.googleapis.com/11554/"; >>> which also includes "/11554", and Hugo considers it as a path so it breaks >>> the path of "static files" (like images). We made a fix. Now I'm working on >>> "getting git to recognize files as renames" as you suggested. >>> >>> @robert: The dates are nice but it causes verbose/long/ugly URLs. We >>> discussed with Aizhamal in the development stage and agreed to get rid of >>> this. For now, we keep the old URLs working in terms of redirecting them. >>> However, from now on, we should change the name convention on blog posts to >>> have a fancy URL like "beam.apache.org/blog/myblogpost.md". :) >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 2:57 AM Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 5:08 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Nam, this looks better. At least links are working, and the website >>>>> visually looks similar and generally in good shape. I think there are >>>>> still >>>>> issues. For example, I do not see any of the images (e.g. the beam logo on >>>>> top left is missing.) >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 3:11 PM Brian Hulette <bhule...@google.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I left a comment on the PR [1]. I think the reason all of the website >>>>>> content is not being tracked as file renames is because there was a >>>>>> series >>>>>> of commits that created files in the new directory, and then one commit >>>>>> that deleted the old directory. If there were a single commit with all of >>>>>> the deleted and new files, git would surely recognize they are >>>>>> effectively >>>>>> renameds and mark them as such. Maybe we just need to get all these >>>>>> commits >>>>>> squashed into one? >>>>>> >>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11554#issuecomment-621489844 >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Nam, could you try this? If we can get git to recognize these as >>>>> renames, review process would be much easier. >>>>> >>>> >>>> +1. >>>> >>>> Alternatively, create a commit that just moves the files into a new >>>> location (which git can always detect), then sit the edits on top of that >>>> (which should preserve history better). >>>> >>>> Also, is there a reason the dates were removed from the blog post >>>> filenames? For content like that, the dates are nice. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:39 AM Nam Bui <nam....@polidea.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi guys, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm Nam - from the responsible team of Apache Beam website >>>>>>> migration. I am pleased to answer some of the questions here. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> @aizhamal: Thanks for informing to the community. :) >>>>>>> @altay, @robertwb: Yes. there is a problem with the staged version >>>>>>> at the moment. We didn't expect some behaviours on the build process. >>>>>>> So, >>>>>>> we fixed it today and been waiting for @pablo to re-run it again. The >>>>>>> purpose of this PR is to migrate completely Beam site from Jekyll to >>>>>>> Hugo. >>>>>>> Therefore, a bunch of deleted markdown files are from Jekyll which was >>>>>>> located at `beam/website/src`, and Hugo is located at `beam/website/www` >>>>>>> now. In `beam/website/README.md`, I wrote down about running the Hugo >>>>>>> website locally, although it is actually same as Jekyll (because it's >>>>>>> also >>>>>>> set up with Docker & Gradle). In `beam/website/CONTRIBUTE.md`, I guided >>>>>>> people on how to get started with Hugo on the Beam website. There is >>>>>>> also a >>>>>>> link in the "Translation Guide" section which points to a branch of >>>>>>> multilingual provenance, and it will become a next PR soon. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please let me know if you need more details. Feel free to ask any >>>>>>> questions and I will get back to you with answers. I'm so sorry if I >>>>>>> answer >>>>>>> a little bit due to the timezone. :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>> Nam >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 8:49 PM Aizhamal Nurmamat kyzy < >>>>>>> aizha...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Adding +Nam Bui <nam....@polidea.com> and +Karolina Rosół >>>>>>>> <karolina.ro...@polidea.com> to follow up on questions. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 11:34 AM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I am having trouble reviewing the staged version. What is the best >>>>>>>>> way to review this change? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Do we expect any changes to markdown files, beyond some metadata? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 10:45 AM Robert Bradshaw < >>>>>>>>> rober...@google.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks. It'll be great to better support more languages. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I looked at the PR and there seems to be no provenance/history. >>>>>>>>>> E.g. all the content seems to be entirely new files rather than >>>>>>>>>> diffs from >>>>>>>>>> the old. (There also seems to be a huge amount of auto-generated js >>>>>>>>>> code as >>>>>>>>>> well.) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I agree. This makes it very hard to review. I also see a bunch of >>>>>>>>> deleted markdown files. Are they not getting migrated? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 10:23 AM Aizhamal Nurmamat kyzy < >>>>>>>>>> aizha...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hello everybody, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> We are almost done migrating the Apache Beam website from Jekyll >>>>>>>>>>> to Hugo. You can see the PR in [1], and we'd love to hear your >>>>>>>>>>> feedback/comments on the PR. It includes detailed guidelines on >>>>>>>>>>> contributing to the new Hugo-based website and adding translations >>>>>>>>>>> to pages >>>>>>>>>>> [2]. For those who are curious about adding new languages, we will >>>>>>>>>>> provide >>>>>>>>>>> a proof of concept in the next couple of days in this thread. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Since we want to move forward with the PR, I would like to ask >>>>>>>>>>> the community to hold off changes to the current Beam website for a >>>>>>>>>>> week, >>>>>>>>>>> until we are able to review and merge the PR. Is this acceptable to >>>>>>>>>>> everyone? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> In case anyone missed my previous email with the background for >>>>>>>>>>> the website migration, you can find more context here [3]. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>> Aizhamal >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11554 >>>>>>>>>>> [2] >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/256b7042bf504b94f161ca03b388a2ba247918d9/website/CONTRIBUTE.md >>>>>>>>>>> [3] >>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r7fa6d710c0a1959cce5108e460d71c306ce5756cf96af818b41cb7ca%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
