Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

avoid repeating invalid links #3

Open
chalin opened this issue Dec 8, 2016 · 2 comments
Open

avoid repeating invalid links #3

chalin opened this issue Dec 8, 2016 · 2 comments
Assignees

Comments

@chalin
Copy link
Collaborator

chalin commented Dec 8, 2016

Run the command linkcheck https://webdev.dartlang.org. Part of the output generated will be as shown below. Note that the two 404s are repeated 5 times. It would be nice to list the erroneous links only once.

https://webdev.dartlang.org/angular/guide
- (534:7) 'Cookbook' => https://webdev.dartlang.org/angular/cookbook/ (HTTP 301 => 404)
  - redirect path:
    - https://webdev.dartlang.org/angular/cookbook/ (301)
    - /angular/cookbook (404)
- (556:21) 'Change Log' => https://webdev.dartlang.org/angular/guide/change-log.html (HTTP 301 => 404)
  - redirect path:
    - https://webdev.dartlang.org/angular/guide/change-log.html (301)
    - /angular/guide/change-log (404)
- (534:7) 'Cookbook' => https://webdev.dartlang.org/angular/cookbook/ (HTTP 301 => 404)
  - redirect path:
    - https://webdev.dartlang.org/angular/cookbook/ (301)
    - /angular/cookbook (404)
- (556:21) 'Change Log' => https://webdev.dartlang.org/angular/guide/change-log.html (HTTP 301 => 404)
  - redirect path:
    - https://webdev.dartlang.org/angular/guide/change-log.html (301)
    - /angular/guide/change-log (404)
- (534:7) 'Cookbook' => https://webdev.dartlang.org/angular/cookbook/ (HTTP 301 => 404)
  - redirect path:
    - https://webdev.dartlang.org/angular/cookbook/ (301)
    - /angular/cookbook (404)
- (556:21) 'Change Log' => https://webdev.dartlang.org/angular/guide/change-log.html (HTTP 301 => 404)
  - redirect path:
    - https://webdev.dartlang.org/angular/guide/change-log.html (301)
    - /angular/guide/change-log (404)
- (534:7) 'Cookbook' => https://webdev.dartlang.org/angular/cookbook/ (HTTP 301 => 404)
  - redirect path:
    - https://webdev.dartlang.org/angular/cookbook/ (301)
    - /angular/cookbook (404)
- (556:21) 'Change Log' => https://webdev.dartlang.org/angular/guide/change-log.html (HTTP 301 => 404)
  - redirect path:
    - https://webdev.dartlang.org/angular/guide/change-log.html (301)
    - /angular/guide/change-log (404)
- (534:7) 'Cookbook' => https://webdev.dartlang.org/angular/cookbook/ (HTTP 301 => 404)
  - redirect path:
    - https://webdev.dartlang.org/angular/cookbook/ (301)
    - /angular/cookbook (404)
- (556:21) 'Change Log' => https://webdev.dartlang.org/angular/guide/change-log.html (HTTP 301 => 404)
  - redirect path:
    - https://webdev.dartlang.org/angular/guide/change-log.html (301)
    - /angular/guide/change-log (404)
@filiph
Copy link
Owner

filiph commented Dec 15, 2016

To give more context on this design decision: the output is currently geared towards writers. Writers want to see where the broken links are, and want to see all of them (even if they're duplicated in terms of destination).

For dartlang.org, we're currently using linkcheck as 'webmasters'. We want to see what pages on the site are broken and we don't need a lot of insight on where those links are in the source pages. It's a different context and it needs a different way of sorting.

I plan a --webmaster mode (naming TBD) that does just that. I think the default mode should be writers as, in the usual scenario, only few links are broken, and mostly because they need updating on the source side, not the destination side.

This is just my thinking. I'm eager for input.

@filiph filiph self-assigned this Dec 15, 2016
@chalin
Copy link
Collaborator Author

chalin commented Dec 15, 2016

That makes sense. Given this new understanding, I'd say that #2 is of higher priority, since for the use case I am targeting, most of the repeated links are ones that I'd want to exclude.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants