+1 for removing the blogs page. I don't think that we need it anymore to highlight activity.
I also don't think that there is a need to keep it around, but I wouldn't oppose at least replacing it with a page that explains why we no longer maintain it in case it was referenced in books. I don't think that we need to maintain the links for this purpose because I wouldn't expect existing links to go to our page only to make the reader click a link to the real post. As far as boosting search rankings, I don't think that is a good reason to keep it either. The page is no longer a good representation of all of the Iceberg content out there (which is great!) so it's no longer providing more signal than noise. I'm also +1 for linking to the YouTube channel instead of having the talks list. Ryan On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 4:41 PM Russell Spitzer <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm not running into an error, I just didn't have time to check the linter > so I was wondering if it would throw an error or if it's ok with orphan > pages. > > On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 6:04 PM Kevin Liu <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Assuming you're referring to this markdown linter from #13977 >> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/13977/files#diff-9b85f23b4c70aa16ae63b7e816cdfeb7312f5c941d758cb9e6f05939004e1886R243>, >> I think you can change the path to `**/*.md` so it searches through all the >> markdown files. >> What error are you seeing from the linter? I can also ping you on Slack. >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 2:39 PM Russell Spitzer < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Does anyone know if we can support an orphaned page in MkDocs without >>> the new Markdown linter complaining? I'm testing >>> out a build where we keep the page but disable robots/nofollow on it. >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 1:24 PM Kevin Liu <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Thank you, Alex! I think we can proceed with the removal first. >>>> >>>> I'm also +1 on an official blog for project announcements. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> Kevin Liu >>>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 10:46 AM Alex Merced >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I have new home for continued development of the list created that >>>>> people will be able to make pull requests into to add blogs and will cover >>>>> a few other Lakehouse related OSS projects. Will post the details early >>>>> next week, earlier if possible. >>>>> >>>>> *Alex Merced <https://bio.alexmerced.com/data>, * >>>>> *Head of DevRel, Dremio **Dremio.com* >>>>> <https://www.dremio.com/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=signature&utm_term=na&utm_content=email-signature&utm_campaign=email-signature>*/ >>>>> **Follow Us on LinkedIn!* <https://www.linkedin.com/company/dremio> >>>>> *Resources for Getting Hands-on with Apache Iceberg/Dremio* >>>>> <https://medium.com/data-engineering-with-dremio/a-deep-intro-to-apache-iceberg-and-resources-for-learning-more-be51535cff74> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 12:39 PM Kevin Liu <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> The relevant links are either the top-level pages: >>>>>> - https://iceberg.apache.org/blogs/ >>>>>> - https://iceberg.apache.org/talks/ >>>>>> or the individual posts they reference. Examples from each page: >>>>>> - >>>>>> https://iceberg.apache.org/blogs/#kafka-to-iceberg-exploring-the-options >>>>>> - https://iceberg.apache.org/talks/#supporting-s3-tables-in-daft >>>>>> >>>>>> Each post already links to an external source, so fixing the links >>>>>> should be relatively easy. >>>>>> >>>>>> I find the current blogs and posts useful, and they serve as a nice >>>>>> look back at the project’s history. However, I think we should find >>>>>> another >>>>>> home for this content. Just not in the iceberg.apache.org site, >>>>>> where every change requires approval through the repo. >>>>>> >>>>>> I’m still in favor of removing these pages from the website and >>>>>> moving them to another location. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best, >>>>>> Kevin Liu >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 10:35 AM Anton Okolnychyi < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I think the project is too big now for us to maintain the list in >>>>>>> its current form. I believe the original intent was to include >>>>>>> references >>>>>>> to any mentions of Iceberg to boost visibility as there was no company >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> would sponsor any media coverage for Iceberg in early days. At that time >>>>>>> the list of mentions was very small and we didn’t have any vendors. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We can keep links accessible not to break books and other printed >>>>>>> materials. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Also, +1 on an official blog with announcements similar to Flink and >>>>>>> other larger projects. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - Anton >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 4:54 PM Russell Spitzer < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I could see us keeping a deprecated version of the page, but I >>>>>>>> think the rationale of boosting search engine impacts for blog posts >>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>> are already on the page is actually one of the reasons we should >>>>>>>> remove the >>>>>>>> page. As a community we don't want to have a set of "special" blog >>>>>>>> posts >>>>>>>> that the project gives special importance. If posts on this page get a >>>>>>>> boost on search engines that other posts don't get, it makes me a bit >>>>>>>> nervous. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 11:41 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It sounds reasonable to me. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> For background, Apache projects have different approaches about >>>>>>>>> blog: >>>>>>>>> - some are using blog more like announcements for the projects but >>>>>>>>> also dependent projects (https://camel.apache.org/blog/) >>>>>>>>> - some are just listing blog post links related to the project >>>>>>>>> (https://karaf.apache.org/documentation.html#articles) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The foundation has a blog related to news ( >>>>>>>>> https://news.apache.org/). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'm not a big fan of blog in projects with content (because it's >>>>>>>>> hard >>>>>>>>> to maintain and never up to date), but I think it's valuable for >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> community to easily find resources about the projects. >>>>>>>>> So, just a blog page with links to different blog posts is good >>>>>>>>> enough >>>>>>>>> (but it needs some attention to be "maintained"). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Just my $0.01 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>> JB >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 11:03 PM Russell Spitzer >>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > Hi Y'all >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > We talked about this a bit in a community sync a while back and >>>>>>>>> I know a bunch of committers have >>>>>>>>> > been working off some of the consensus we reached then but I'm >>>>>>>>> not sure we ever actually documented >>>>>>>>> > this. >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > 1. Should the Apache Iceberg community still maintain a set of >>>>>>>>> Blogs and Talks that are curated on the >>>>>>>>> > main site by committers and PMC members? >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > The arguments in favor: >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > The current state requires individuals to make decisions on >>>>>>>>> about inclusion/exclusion of content >>>>>>>>> > It is very difficult to maintain and keep up to date >>>>>>>>> > There are lots of blog and talk aggregations for Iceberg content >>>>>>>>> out there already >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > The arguments against: >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > Have an easy place for folks to find more Iceberg Content >>>>>>>>> > Have a location to post internal announcements >>>>>>>>> > ----------- >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > Personally I think we should just drop the blogs site for now >>>>>>>>> with the option of bringing back an Iceberg >>>>>>>>> > dev only blog in the future and switch the Talks page to just >>>>>>>>> link out to the official Youtube channel which mostly >>>>>>>>> > has entries for Iceberg Summit and our community syncs. >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > ------- >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > 2. Should all vendor/integrations link out to external >>>>>>>>> documentation rather than having in tree maintained >>>>>>>>> > documentation? >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > This I think is more straightforward. We have already had a lot >>>>>>>>> of link-rot and Integration documentation falling behind >>>>>>>>> > actual integrations. Here I really don't want to break any >>>>>>>>> previous hard links to Iceberg's docs so I think we should leave >>>>>>>>> > everything currently in tree, in tree. But for all new >>>>>>>>> contributions and on any updates to a vendor.md or integration.md we >>>>>>>>> > should always link out to third party documentation unless we >>>>>>>>> are documenting something that is actually in the Iceberg >>>>>>>>> > library (like S3FileIO and friends). >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > Thanks as usual everyone, >>>>>>>>> > Russ >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > Here is a PR with my suggested changes for the above two points >>>>>>>>> > https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/14110 >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
