RE: Cordova Documentation version based urls make for poor web search targets
To follow on to this point: The documentation URL in the MIDDLE of cordova.apache.org still points to the 2.4.0 docs. The one on the bottom correctly points to 2.5.0. Couldn't all links just point to the LATEST version of the docs and have the server just handle the redirection via symlink? Thanks, Marc
Re: Cordova Documentation version based urls make for poor web search targets
> > When I google for cordova documentation, I'm usually taken to an old version > (say, 2.1.0). This has also been a problem with the PhoneGap documentation. Eventually, the doc generator will be rewritten and we should definitely keep this issue in mind. It would be nice to have a short-term solution though. I like the idea of adding some JavaScript inspection and rendering a small flash message at the top. I'll create a JIRA issue for this. Also, I took a look at how some other projects do it (like python) and they > just use a single url for "latest" and only create custom version-based > urls for previous releases. (And since they link to latest more often than > to specific releases, I guess it naturally ranks higher) Yup, I think the "latest" directory or storing the latest release in the root directory should be a long-term solution for the rewritten generator. The documentation URL in the MIDDLE of cordova.apache.org still points to > the 2.4.0 docs. The one on the bottom correctly points to 2.5.0. Couldn't > all links just point to the LATEST version of the docs and have the server > just handle the redirection via symlink? I noticed this as well and updated the generator. That documentation link is now generated from the latest release version, so there is no need to manually update it. On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Marc Fielding wrote: > To follow on to this point: > > The documentation URL in the MIDDLE of cordova.apache.org still points to > the 2.4.0 docs. The one on the bottom correctly points to 2.5.0. Couldn't > all links just point to the LATEST version of the docs and have the server > just handle the redirection via symlink? > > Thanks, > > Marc
Re: Cordova Documentation version based urls make for poor web search targets
Created the issue here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-2619 On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 3:40 PM, Michael Brooks wrote: > When I google for cordova documentation, I'm usually taken to an old version >> (say, 2.1.0). > > > This has also been a problem with the PhoneGap documentation. > > Eventually, the doc generator will be rewritten and we should definitely > keep this issue in mind. > > It would be nice to have a short-term solution though. I like the idea of > adding some JavaScript inspection and rendering a small flash message at > the top. I'll create a JIRA issue for this. > > Also, I took a look at how some other projects do it (like python) and they >> just use a single url for "latest" and only create custom version-based >> urls for previous releases. (And since they link to latest more often >> than >> to specific releases, I guess it naturally ranks higher) > > > Yup, I think the "latest" directory or storing the latest release in the > root directory should be a long-term solution for the rewritten generator. > > The documentation URL in the MIDDLE of cordova.apache.org still points to >> the 2.4.0 docs. The one on the bottom correctly points to 2.5.0. Couldn't >> all links just point to the LATEST version of the docs and have the server >> just handle the redirection via symlink? > > > I noticed this as well and updated the generator. That documentation link > is now generated from the latest release version, so there is no need to > manually update it. > > On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Marc Fielding < > marc.field...@dataclysm.com> wrote: > >> To follow on to this point: >> >> The documentation URL in the MIDDLE of cordova.apache.org still points >> to the 2.4.0 docs. The one on the bottom correctly points to 2.5.0. >> Couldn't all links just point to the LATEST version of the docs and have >> the server just handle the redirection via symlink? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Marc > > >
