• Vladimir Panteleev (12/12) Sep 18 2014 The DDox documentation generator (and DMD's JSON output, which it
• Andrei Alexandrescu (2/13) Sep 18 2014 Is there a way to disable indexing by google yet keep them? -- Andrei
• Vladimir Panteleev (7/31) Sep 18 2014 Yes, listing them in robots.txt, which was what I suggested. I'm
• Jakob Ovrum (4/10) Sep 18 2014 I think we should do it, but robots.txt is tracked by the git
• =?UTF-8?B?U8O2bmtlIEx1ZHdpZw==?= (4/15) Sep 18 2014 It would help a lot if someone could simply update to the latest
• Andrei Alexandrescu (2/20) Sep 19 2014 I'll put that on my ever-overflowing list. -- Andrei
• Vladimir Panteleev (4/10) Sep 19 2014 This particular task (updating the website) sounds like it could
• Andrei Alexandrescu (3/11) Sep 19 2014 Yah, in this case my task is to discuss security policy with Walter and
• =?UTF-8?B?U8O2bmtlIEx1ZHdpZw==?= (4/16) Sep 19 2014 Yeah, that would be even better. If there was a limited user account

"Vladimir Panteleev" <vladimir thecybershadow.net> writes:

The DDox documentation generator (and DMD's JSON output, which it 
heavily relies on) still seems to have a far way to go, as can be 
seen from the project's numerous open reported issues[1] and 
multiple problems with pages such as [2].

I've been getting the DDox versions of Phobos documentation at 
the top of my Google search results, which is a little annoying. 
We could remove the pages from search engines via robots.txt 
until DDox is ready.

Should they be removed from Google for now? Or does anyone find 
them useful?

   [1]: https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/ddox/issues
   [2]: http://dlang.org/library/std/process/execute.html

Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:

On 9/18/14, 4:10 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
 The DDox documentation generator (and DMD's JSON output, which it
 heavily relies on) still seems to have a far way to go, as can be seen
 from the project's numerous open reported issues[1] and multiple
 problems with pages such as [2].

 I've been getting the DDox versions of Phobos documentation at the top
 of my Google search results, which is a little annoying. We could remove
 the pages from search engines via robots.txt until DDox is ready.

 Should they be removed from Google for now? Or does anyone find them
 useful?

    [1]: https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/ddox/issues
    [2]: http://dlang.org/library/std/process/execute.html

Is there a way to disable indexing by google yet keep them? -- Andrei

"Vladimir Panteleev" <vladimir thecybershadow.net> writes:

On Friday, 19 September 2014 at 04:35:04 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
 On 9/18/14, 4:10 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
 The DDox documentation generator (and DMD's JSON output, which 
 it
 heavily relies on) still seems to have a far way to go, as can 
 be seen
 from the project's numerous open reported issues[1] and 
 multiple
 problems with pages such as [2].

 I've been getting the DDox versions of Phobos documentation at 
 the top
 of my Google search results, which is a little annoying. We 
 could remove
 the pages from search engines via robots.txt until DDox is 
 ready.

 Should they be removed from Google for now? Or does anyone 
 find them
 useful?

   [1]: https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/ddox/issues
   [2]: http://dlang.org/library/std/process/execute.html

 Is there a way to disable indexing by google yet keep them? -- 
 Andrei

Yes, listing them in robots.txt, which was what I suggested. I'm 
not saying we should actually remove them from the website :)

We already have /phobos-prerelease/ and /library-prerelease/ in 
robots.txt:
http://dlang.org/robots.txt

"Jakob Ovrum" <jakobovrum gmail.com> writes:

On Friday, 19 September 2014 at 04:37:22 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
wrote:
 Yes, listing them in robots.txt, which was what I suggested. 
 I'm not saying we should actually remove them from the website 
 :)

 We already have /phobos-prerelease/ and /library-prerelease/ in 
 robots.txt:
 http://dlang.org/robots.txt

I think we should do it, but robots.txt is tracked by the git 
repository, so might as well continue this in a PR?

=?UTF-8?B?U8O2bmtlIEx1ZHdpZw==?= <sludwig rejectedsoftware.com> writes:

Am 19.09.2014 01:10, schrieb Vladimir Panteleev:
 The DDox documentation generator (and DMD's JSON output, which it
 heavily relies on) still seems to have a far way to go, as can be seen
 from the project's numerous open reported issues[1] and multiple
 problems with pages such as [2].

 I've been getting the DDox versions of Phobos documentation at the top
 of my Google search results, which is a little annoying. We could remove
 the pages from search engines via robots.txt until DDox is ready.

 Should they be removed from Google for now? Or does anyone find them
 useful?

    [1]: https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/ddox/issues
    [2]: http://dlang.org/library/std/process/execute.html

It would help a lot if someone could simply update to the latest 
version. It's simply pointless for me to keep fixing bugs if they never 
show up on the site.

Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:

On 9/18/14, 11:56 PM, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
 Am 19.09.2014 01:10, schrieb Vladimir Panteleev:
 The DDox documentation generator (and DMD's JSON output, which it
 heavily relies on) still seems to have a far way to go, as can be seen
 from the project's numerous open reported issues[1] and multiple
 problems with pages such as [2].

 I've been getting the DDox versions of Phobos documentation at the top
 of my Google search results, which is a little annoying. We could remove
 the pages from search engines via robots.txt until DDox is ready.

 Should they be removed from Google for now? Or does anyone find them
 useful?

    [1]: https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/ddox/issues
    [2]: http://dlang.org/library/std/process/execute.html

 It would help a lot if someone could simply update to the latest
 version. It's simply pointless for me to keep fixing bugs if they never
 show up on the site.

I'll put that on my ever-overflowing list. -- Andrei

"Vladimir Panteleev" <vladimir thecybershadow.net> writes:

On Friday, 19 September 2014 at 15:04:30 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
 It would help a lot if someone could simply update to the 
 latest
 version. It's simply pointless for me to keep fixing bugs if 
 they never
 show up on the site.

 I'll put that on my ever-overflowing list. -- Andrei

This particular task (updating the website) sounds like it could 
be delegated to someone else, no?

Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:

On 9/19/14, 8:21 AM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
 On Friday, 19 September 2014 at 15:04:30 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 It would help a lot if someone could simply update to the latest
 version. It's simply pointless for me to keep fixing bugs if they never
 show up on the site.

 I'll put that on my ever-overflowing list. -- Andrei

 This particular task (updating the website) sounds like it could be
 delegated to someone else, no?

Yah, in this case my task is to discuss security policy with Walter and 
our sysadmin. We need to get a few user accounts going. -- Andrei

=?UTF-8?B?U8O2bmtlIEx1ZHdpZw==?= <sludwig rejectedsoftware.com> writes:

Am 19.09.2014 17:47, schrieb Andrei Alexandrescu:
 On 9/19/14, 8:21 AM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
 On Friday, 19 September 2014 at 15:04:30 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 It would help a lot if someone could simply update to the latest
 version. It's simply pointless for me to keep fixing bugs if they never
 show up on the site.

 I'll put that on my ever-overflowing list. -- Andrei

 This particular task (updating the website) sounds like it could be
 delegated to someone else, no?

 Yah, in this case my task is to discuss security policy with Walter and
 our sysadmin. We need to get a few user accounts going. -- Andrei

Yeah, that would be even better. If there was a limited user account 
with write access to just the documentation folder, I would happily 
manage the upload of the updated docs myself.