docs: deprecate backups with shell scripts #181
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks @davidekete for submitting this PR. It will need a couple of changes before I can merge it -- the pages that used to refer to the deleted page need their links to be changed, rather than removed.
The RTD preview still builds (I guess because of the "deprecate-\"backup-with-shell-scripts\"" message) but doing the deprecation this way means that the links are just removed, without any changes to the text. This would degrade the user experience, if they come across text like in the how-to page that tells them to refer to the example reference page -- which they won't be able to find, because the link is removed, but so is the page. It's much better to point to the correct place to make life easier for the user.
Instead of using this deprecation method, I would strongly prefer that we replace each link that would be broken with the URL to the Discourse post. The surrounding text may also need to be changed to make it make sense (since it will now point outside of the docs). This will need to be done on:
- /explanation/intro-to/backups.md (line 36)
- /how-to/backups/back-up-using-shell-scripts.md (line 12)
- /reference/backups/archive-rotation-shell-script.md (line 5)
We will also need a permanent redirect set up in the custom_conf.py file to ensure that any traffic coming in via users' bookmarks gets sent to the Discourse post URL as well.
|
Hi @s-makin, thanks for the review. In my last commit, I:
|
|
@s-makin bump |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry for the delay @davidekete, I got interrupted mid-review and forgot to submit it!
There are a couple of fixups to the links, which I've added suggestions for. I do have a question about the banner I'm seeing on the front page of the PR:
I didn't see this text anywhere in any of the changed files, and I can't figure out why it's still showing up as a warning. I'm happy to apply the fixups, but would you mind looking into this and undoing whatever it is that's feeding that warning?
Hi @s-makin, that warning occurs because the branch name literally contains special or “hidden” characters—in this case, the backslash-escaped quotes (my bad). It's GitHub's way of warning you that the name might not be what it appears at first glance. Renaming the branch would make the error go away. However, I can't rename the branch without closing this PR and opening a new one which I do not recommend. |
Ahhh, yes, that makes sense! Thanks for clarifying - I agree, there's no point in redoing the work on another branch, I'm happy to merge this as-is. Thanks again for all your work on this issue! |
* docs: deprecate backups with shell scripts --------- Co-authored-by: Sally <sally.makin@canonical.com>
Description
This PR closes the CODA issue: canonical/open-documentation-academy#171
Related Issue
If this pull request addresses an existing issue, please link to it below. Use the
Fixes #<issue-number>syntax toclose the issue automatically when the pull request is merged.
Example:
Contributor License Agreement (CLA)
By contributing to this project, you agree to the terms of
the Canonical Contributor License Agreement (CLA).
If you have not already signed the CLA, please do so here.
Commit Message for Squash Merge
We typically squash commits when merging. You can specify the commit message that should be used in this case if you wish.
Provide the desired commit message below:
[(optional) category] Brief description of changes made, and why
Checklist
Additional Notes (Optional)
Add any extra information or context that reviewers may need to know. This could include testing instructions,
screenshots, or links to related discussions.
Thank you for contributing to the Ubuntu Server documentation!