Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Re-introduce canonical URL for docs generator #9917

Merged

Conversation

straight-shoota
Copy link
Member

The previous attempt in #8348 to use sitemaps to indicate preference of latest version over older ones to search engines doesn't seem to work. Instead, the solution applied for similar situations is canonical links. This mostly reinstates the canonical link behaviour prior to #8348

Hopefully finally resolves most of #5952

The previous attempt to use sitemaps to indicate preference of latest
version over older ones to search engines doesn't seem to work.
Instead, the solution applied for similar situations is canonical
links. This mostly reinstates the canonical link behaviour prior to
crystal-lang#8348
Copy link
Member

@jhass jhass left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code wise this seems fine. I cannot comment much on effectiveness or integration to our infrastructure.

@straight-shoota
Copy link
Member Author

I don't think anyone can really tell. But it seems to be what most others are doing. And the alternative doesn't seem to work.

@bcardiff
Copy link
Member

bcardiff commented Dec 1, 2020

We need to tweak the Makefile docs target or change the DOCS_OPTIONS env variable in bin/ci and in distribution-scripts after 1.0 then.

@straight-shoota straight-shoota added this to the 1.0.0 milestone Dec 1, 2020
@straight-shoota
Copy link
Member Author

Yes, I'll do that as soon as this gets merged.

@straight-shoota
Copy link
Member Author

I guess the bin/ci change could've been included here directly. But here it is: #10007 and crystal-lang/distribution-scripts#77

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants