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

Update online docs URL. #434

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: 1.x
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

johnsmartco
Copy link

No description provided.

@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ The executable jar can be executed with a command like `java -jar dsbulk-distrib

## Documentation

The most up-to-date documentation is available [online][onlineDocs].
The most up-to-date documentation is available [online](https://docs.datastax.com/en/dsbulk/docs/1.9.0/dsbulkAbout.html).
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Since you are inlining the link, please remove the "footpage link" at the bottom of the page:

[onlineDocs]:https://docs.datastax.com/en/dsbulk/doc/

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Also, couldn't we avoid hard-coding 1.9 in the URL? E.g. by using a "latest" redirect?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Regarding the /latest/ instead of /1.9.0/, that proposed scheme was objected to by a prior generation of doc leads. Something about customers assuming their version was the "latest" and complained to Support that they couldn't get a doc'd feature (introduced in a more recent release) to work. For the moment I'll need to hardcode the /1.9.0/ but you raise a fair point.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes will remove the [onlineDocs] reference from the footer. Thanks for spotting it.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I understand the customers objections. But in the present case, we are considering DSBulk's own in-tree README file. Moreover, the link is being described as "the most up-to-date documentation". If we hard-code 1.9.0 here, the README file and this description will become outdated as soon as we publish a 1.10 release. Are we sure this is what we want?

@johnsmartco johnsmartco requested a review from adutra July 29, 2022 17:02
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants