Hi Andrea, On Dec 16, 2012, at 2:44 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Dave Fisher wrote: >> I think that we can purge these *.htm duplicates, but if we do it >> will be a "sledgehammer" build. > > It will also be a problem, unless we accompany it with other changes: for > example, http://www.openoffice.org/pt/ would completely break, and all > external sites that now link to some of our .htm files would break too. Got it. >> It was intentional. Before doing so we would need to make a group >> decision about how to treat the two types of files. > > Regardless of what templates we apply, the best solution should: > 1) Allow a .htaccess redirect/rewrite from .htm to .html (to preserve > existing internal and external links) > 2) Have the SVN file names match the URLs: editing a file named "news.htm" in > SVN should not result in a change in a page with URL ".../news.html". The > current handling confuses the CMS too (for example, no diff is reported). So > either we mass-rename files from .htm to .html and rely on 1) above, or we > don't change .htm to .html but publish .htm URLs. We need only do (1) and I would do it within the httpd config like our existing redirects. Regardless if there are both file1.htm and file1.html in the source, one of these must be removed from the source svn. See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5668 for this request along with a set to avoid an incubator redirect for certain links. We do not need to do (2) because we already are making this change in the staging and publish. You see no diffs for the old htm files because they are not changed. I do see diffs in the html versions of the pages. Even with the redirect in place, it still makes sense to edit the pages to use *.html and not *.htm in links. > >> There are two different procedures from view.pm used: ... >> There are several templates used from templates/. > > To me, .htm and .html are not different file types and were never used as > such: I mean, volunteers historically committed .htm or .html according to > their habits, but it doesn't make sense to have different ways of handling > them now. So I would tend to rename all .htm to .html and put the .htaccess > redirect in place, and have only one "type" of HTML files to handle. I think it is ok to force the pages to be *.html. We should have some consistency. Maybe soon it will be time to start switching openoffice.org to mdtext. Regards, Dave > > Regards, > Andrea.
