> > but I can understand your desire to do > > that. Perhaps just taking a static snapshot using something like > > wget, and hosting that on the R-project website would be a good > > compromise. > > Hmm, wouldn't it be easier if the hosting institution would make a tgz > file? wget over HTTP is rather bad in resolving links etc
Really? I've always found it to be rather excellent. The reason I suggest it is that unless you have some way to generate a static copy of the site, you'll need to ensure that the R-project supports any dynamic content. e.g. for example the user 2008 site uses some (fairly vanilla) php for including the header and footer. > we could include a note on the top page that this is only a snapshot > copy and have a link to the original site (in case something changes > there). That's reasonable, although it would be even better to have it on every page. > > The one problem is setting up a redirect so that existing links and > > google searches aren't broken. This would need to be put in place at > > least 6 months before the old website closed. > > Yes, very good point, I didn't think about that. But the R site is > searched very often, so material there appears rather quickly on > Google searches. Ad bookmarks: I don't want to remove the old site, > just have an archive copy at a central location. In that case, should it be labelled no-index as it's just a cache of material that should be available elsewhere? We need some machine-readable way of indicating where the canonical resource is. It's always frustrated me a little that when googling for r documentation, you find hundreds of the same page hosted at different sites. Hadley -- http://had.co.nz/ ______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
