Unreference old.haxe.org

[ncannasse]

Something for some searches Google is still giving me old.haxe.org as top search result. Maybe we should add some kind of robots.txt to unreference it ? not sure what's the right technical way to do it. We might still want to keep the website online, although it's rarely used.

[Merelleya]

You can set the robots meta tag to noindex. That will remove the pages from the search results.

If there are newer versions of the pages, you could map those and use the attribute canonical to indicate that the old page is a duplicate. This would require more detailed looking into it, though.

On Thu, 14 Jun 2018, 10:13 Nicolas Cannasse, [email protected] wrote:

Something for some searches Google is still giving me old.haxe.org as top search result. Maybe we should add some kind of robots.txt to unreference it ? not sure what's the right technical way to do it. We might still want to keep the website online, although it's rarely used.

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/HaxeFoundation/haxe.org/issues/331, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFSNWhGFwvuHyPSHaw4GrHoDj0u48ljiks5t8hszgaJpZM4UngDA .

[Simn]

IMO the fix here should be to make sure all the content from old.haxe is also available on current.haxe. It already prioritizes correctly, there are just some things missing.

[markknol]

@ncannasse can you give examples when old.haxe appears?

I agree with Simn, all relevant content should be in new docs. I'm not sure what's missing. Some old stuff might be still relevant for Haxe 2 users (like this one http://old.haxe.org/manual/haxe3/migration), removing from search engine would make it harder for people to look that up.

[Merelleya]

I agree, all the relevant content should be moved.

However, the duplicate stuff should then be de-indexed and/or removed both for ranking purposes and clarity. The "some old stuff" should be looked at and it should be decided if it is to be kept or delted. If it is to be kept, it should be moved somewhere sensible.

It is a lot of work, but tidying up has to be done ^-^.

On Mon, 30 Jul 2018 at 11:52, Mark Knol [email protected] wrote:

@ncannasse https://github.com/ncannasse can you give examples when old.haxe appears?

I agree with Simn, all relevant content should be in new docs. I'm not sure what's missing. Some old stuff might be still relevant for Haxe 2 users (like this one http://old.haxe.org/manual/haxe3/migration), removing from search engine would make it harder for people to look that up.

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/HaxeFoundation/haxe.org/issues/331#issuecomment-408809950, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFSNWggdgOFNMBDLeCDPjfSPpsEalMC_ks5uLtdZgaJpZM4UngDA .

[ibilon]

Sorry meant to close https://github.com/HaxeFoundation/HaxeManual/issues/331

[bubblebenj]

Maybe it could be possible to add a note to every page of old.haxe.org saying something like: "If not haxe 2 related, this content should be available on the current haxe site. If not then please fill an issue in the haxe.org github https://github.com/HaxeFoundation/haxe.org/issues/ or better propose a pull request to add it".

[ibilon]

I removed the last reference to old.haxe.org from the blog, I can't find anything in the manual or api doc. The only thing I could find is a comment in the php generator: https://github.com/HaxeFoundation/haxe/blob/development/src/generators/genphp7.ml#L748. Also the old website isn't working anymore. So it should be safe to say google won't recommend it anymore.