Most of this sounds good to me.

>>  |--software/ - list of software released by mozilla.org w/ description
>>  |   |
>>  |   |--mozilla/ - intro & description for all of Mozilla
>>  |   |   |
>>  |   |   |--build/ - build instructions
>>  |   |   |   |       http://mozilla.org/build/
>>  |   |   |   |--beos/
>>  |   |   |   |
>>  |   |   |   |--mac/
>>  |   |   |   |
>>  |   |   |   |--macosx/
>>  |   |   |   |
>>  |   |   |   |--os2/
>>  |   |   |   |
>>  |   |   |   |--unix/
>>  |   |   |   |
>>  |   |   |   |--win32/
>>
> 
> Is this redundant with contrinute/mozilla/ ? Or are they subtly
> different? (The hacking guidelines for each project should probably point
> to any relevant documents in the project documentation, which is basically
> what this is, right?)

This split is fantasai's work; I'll let her explain.

 
>>  |   |--bugzilla/ - for using Bugzilla on your own system
>>  |   |              (subdirectory structure similar to mozilla/,
>>  |   |              above)
> 
> Also, mozbot/ - basically what's in projects/mozbot/ now.

The directories shown are representative. ;-)

 
>>  |--support/ - links to product-specific info under /software/product
> 
> Redundant?


Again, the work of others. I personally think we don't need it.

>>   Key URLs from the old site, such as /MPL and /releases, will
>>   be handled by redirects.
> 
> Why only key redirects? Think about search engines, bookmarks, URIs in
> random documents on the web, etc. I think it would not be that hard to
> redirect the overwhelming majority of links. On my own sites I regularly
> look through my logs and add redirects for almost any old 404, including
> typos; existing files which have moved should IMHO _always_ be redirected.

Well, we do plan to check 404 logs in case we miss important ones, and 
use http://www.mozilla.org/weblogs/ as well. The problem with 
redirecting everything is that a) it's a pain to set up, and b) it 
doesn't encourage people to start using the new URLs.

The often-quoted document on this topic is:
http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI.html

It says:
[ Why do URIs dangle? ]

"We just reorganized our website to make it better.

Do you really feel that the old URIs cannot be kept running? If so, you 
chose them very badly. Think of your new ones so that you will be able 
to keep then running after the next redesign."

This is us, and we are doing exactly what he says :-)

Gerv




Reply via email to