what's really new in python 2.5 ?
just noticed that the first google hit for "what's new in python 2.5": http://docs.python.org/dev/whatsnew/whatsnew25.html points to a document that's a weird mix between that actual document, and a placeholder for "what's new in python 2.6". </F>
On Tuesday 03 October 2006 08:56, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
just noticed that the first google hit for "what's new in python 2.5":
http://docs.python.org/dev/whatsnew/whatsnew25.html
points to a document that's a weird mix between that actual document, and a placeholder for "what's new in python 2.6".
I suspect Google (and all other search engines) should be warded off from docs.python.org/dev/. -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake at acm.org>
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
just noticed that the first google hit for "what's new in python 2.5":
http://docs.python.org/dev/whatsnew/whatsnew25.html
points to a document that's a weird mix between that actual document, and a placeholder for "what's new in python 2.6".
D'oh. It's going to take a while for the stable docs to catch up to that one given the large number of external links to that page using that title :( Since the URL for the actual Python 2.6 What's New finishes with whatsnew26.html, perhaps this URL could be updated to redirect users to the stable version instead? Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia --------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 02:56:54PM +0200, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
just noticed that the first google hit for "what's new in python 2.5":
http://docs.python.org/dev/whatsnew/whatsnew25.html
points to a document that's a weird mix between that actual document, and a placeholder for "what's new in python 2.6".
Thanks for pointing this out! I've added a redirect from /whatsnew25.html to the correct location, but am puzzled by the 2.6 document; it has section names like 'pep-308.html', which are set by a \label{pep-308} directive in the LaTeX, but no such \label exists in the 2.6 document. Neal, could you please delete all the temp files in whatever directory is used to build the documentation? I wonder if there's a *.aux file or something that still has labels from the 2.5 document. It might be easiest to just delete the whatsnew/ directory and then do an 'svn up' to get it back. --amk
On Tuesday 03 October 2006 10:30, A.M. Kuchling wrote:
Neal, could you please delete all the temp files in whatever directory is used to build the documentation? I wonder if there's a *.aux file or something that still has labels from the 2.5 document. It might be easiest to just delete the whatsnew/ directory and then do an 'svn up' to get it back.
I would guess this has everything to do with how the updated docs are deployed and little or nothing about the cleanliness of the working area. The mkhowto script should be cleaning out the old HTML before generating the new. I'm guessing the deployment simply unpacks the new on top of the old; the old should be removed first. For the /dev/ area, I don't think redirects are warranted. I'd rather see the crawlers just not bother with that, since those are more likely decoys than usable end-user docs. -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake at acm.org>
On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 10:39:52AM -0400, Fred L. Drake, Jr. wrote:
and little or nothing about the cleanliness of the working area. The mkhowto script should be cleaning out the old HTML before generating the new. I'm guessing the deployment simply unpacks the new on top of the old; the old should be removed first.
That doesn't explain it, though; the contents of whatsnew26.html contain references to pep-308.html. It's not simply a matter of new files being untarred on top of old. I've added a robots.txt to keep crawlers out of /dev/. --amk
On Tuesday 03 October 2006 14:08, A.M. Kuchling wrote:
That doesn't explain it, though; the contents of whatsnew26.html contain references to pep-308.html. It's not simply a matter of new files being untarred on top of old.
Ah; I missed that the new HTML file was referring to an old heading. That does sound like a .aux file got left around. I don't know what the build process is for the material in docs.python.org/dev/; I think the right thing would be to start each build with a fresh checkout/export. -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake at acm.org>
On 10/3/06, Fred L. Drake, Jr.
On Tuesday 03 October 2006 14:08, A.M. Kuchling wrote:
That doesn't explain it, though; the contents of whatsnew26.html contain references to pep-308.html. It's not simply a matter of new files being untarred on top of old.
Ah; I missed that the new HTML file was referring to an old heading. That does sound like a .aux file got left around.
I don't know what the build process is for the material in docs.python.org/dev/; I think the right thing would be to start each build with a fresh checkout/export.
I probably did not do that to begin with. I did rm -rf Doc && svn up Doc && cd Doc && make. Let me know if there's anything else I should do. I did this for both the 2.5 and 2.6 versions. Let me know if you see anything screwed up after an hour or so. The new versions should be up by then. n
On Wednesday 04 October 2006 00:32, Neal Norwitz wrote:
I probably did not do that to begin with. I did rm -rf Doc && svn up Doc && cd Doc && make. Let me know if there's anything else I should do. I did this for both the 2.5 and 2.6 versions.
That certainly sounds like it should be sufficient. The doc build should never write anywhere but within the Doc/ tree; it doesn't even use the tempfile module to pick up any other temporary scratch space. -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake at acm.org>
On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 09:32:43PM -0700, Neal Norwitz wrote:
Let me know if you see anything screwed up after an hour or so. The new versions should be up by then.
Thanks! That seems to have cleared things up -- the section names are now node2.html, node3.html, ..., which is what I'd expect for the 2.6 document. --amk
On 2006-10-03 20:10:14 +0200, A.M. Kuchling wrote:
I've added a robots.txt to keep crawlers out of /dev/.
Isn't there a lot of useful, search-engine worthy stuff in /dev? I search for peps with google, and I suppose the 'explanation' section, as well as the developer faq and subversion instructions, are good pages that deserve to be in the google index. Should /dev really be Disallow:'ed entirely in robots.txt? kind regards, Gerrit Holl.
Gerrit Holl wrote:
On 2006-10-03 20:10:14 +0200, A.M. Kuchling wrote:
I've added a robots.txt to keep crawlers out of /dev/.
Isn't there a lot of useful, search-engine worthy stuff in /dev? I search for peps with google, and I suppose the 'explanation' section, as well as the developer faq and subversion instructions, are good pages that deserve to be in the google index. Should /dev really be Disallow:'ed entirely in robots.txt?
I think that refers to docs.python.org/dev. Georg
On Friday 06 October 2006 08:35, Gerrit Holl wrote:
Isn't there a lot of useful, search-engine worthy stuff in /dev? I search for peps with google, and I suppose the 'explanation' section, as well as the developer faq and subversion instructions, are good pages that deserve to be in the google index. Should /dev really be Disallow:'ed entirely in robots.txt?
As Georg noted, we've been discussing docs.python.org/dev/, which contains nightly builds of the documentation on a couple of branches. The material at www.python.org/dev/ is generally interesting, as you note, and remains open to crawlers. -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake at acm.org>
participants (7)
-
A.M. Kuchling -
Fred L. Drake, Jr. -
Fredrik Lundh -
Georg Brandl -
Gerrit Holl -
Neal Norwitz -
Nick Coghlan