Thanks everyone for chiming in on this. Looks like we have consensus to move forward to remove the blogs and talks page. If there's no more feedback, I'll merge the PR this afternoon ( https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/14110).
Alex has started a thread on a community maintained list for blogs and posts (https://lists.apache.org/thread/1r0w72d9nqm1rqwc81v3rccnf8pvm08l). We can migrate the contents to that list. Thanks Alex! Best, Kevin Liu On Tue, Sep 23, 2025 at 11:58 AM Ryan Blue <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 for removing the blogs page. I don't think that we need it anymore to > highlight activity. > > I also don't think that there is a need to keep it around, but I wouldn't > oppose at least replacing it with a page that explains why we no longer > maintain it in case it was referenced in books. I don't think that we need > to maintain the links for this purpose because I wouldn't expect existing > links to go to our page only to make the reader click a link to the real > post. > > As far as boosting search rankings, I don't think that is a good reason to > keep it either. The page is no longer a good representation of all of the > Iceberg content out there (which is great!) so it's no longer providing > more signal than noise. > > I'm also +1 for linking to the YouTube channel instead of having the talks > list. > > Ryan > > On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 4:41 PM Russell Spitzer <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I'm not running into an error, I just didn't have time to check the >> linter so I was wondering if it would throw an error or if it's ok with >> orphan pages. >> >> On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 6:04 PM Kevin Liu <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Assuming you're referring to this markdown linter from #13977 >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/13977/files#diff-9b85f23b4c70aa16ae63b7e816cdfeb7312f5c941d758cb9e6f05939004e1886R243>, >>> I think you can change the path to `**/*.md` so it searches through all the >>> markdown files. >>> What error are you seeing from the linter? I can also ping you on Slack. >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 2:39 PM Russell Spitzer < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Does anyone know if we can support an orphaned page in MkDocs without >>>> the new Markdown linter complaining? I'm testing >>>> out a build where we keep the page but disable robots/nofollow on it. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 1:24 PM Kevin Liu <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Thank you, Alex! I think we can proceed with the removal first. >>>>> >>>>> I'm also +1 on an official blog for project announcements. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> Kevin Liu >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 10:46 AM Alex Merced >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I have new home for continued development of the list created that >>>>>> people will be able to make pull requests into to add blogs and will >>>>>> cover >>>>>> a few other Lakehouse related OSS projects. Will post the details early >>>>>> next week, earlier if possible. >>>>>> >>>>>> *Alex Merced <https://bio.alexmerced.com/data>, * >>>>>> *Head of DevRel, Dremio **Dremio.com* >>>>>> <https://www.dremio.com/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=signature&utm_term=na&utm_content=email-signature&utm_campaign=email-signature>*/ >>>>>> **Follow Us on LinkedIn!* <https://www.linkedin.com/company/dremio> >>>>>> *Resources for Getting Hands-on with Apache Iceberg/Dremio* >>>>>> <https://medium.com/data-engineering-with-dremio/a-deep-intro-to-apache-iceberg-and-resources-for-learning-more-be51535cff74> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 12:39 PM Kevin Liu <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> The relevant links are either the top-level pages: >>>>>>> - https://iceberg.apache.org/blogs/ >>>>>>> - https://iceberg.apache.org/talks/ >>>>>>> or the individual posts they reference. Examples from each page: >>>>>>> - >>>>>>> https://iceberg.apache.org/blogs/#kafka-to-iceberg-exploring-the-options >>>>>>> - https://iceberg.apache.org/talks/#supporting-s3-tables-in-daft >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Each post already links to an external source, so fixing the links >>>>>>> should be relatively easy. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I find the current blogs and posts useful, and they serve as a nice >>>>>>> look back at the project’s history. However, I think we should find >>>>>>> another >>>>>>> home for this content. Just not in the iceberg.apache.org site, >>>>>>> where every change requires approval through the repo. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I’m still in favor of removing these pages from the website and >>>>>>> moving them to another location. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>> Kevin Liu >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 10:35 AM Anton Okolnychyi < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think the project is too big now for us to maintain the list in >>>>>>>> its current form. I believe the original intent was to include >>>>>>>> references >>>>>>>> to any mentions of Iceberg to boost visibility as there was no company >>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>> would sponsor any media coverage for Iceberg in early days. At that >>>>>>>> time >>>>>>>> the list of mentions was very small and we didn’t have any vendors. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We can keep links accessible not to break books and other printed >>>>>>>> materials. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Also, +1 on an official blog with announcements similar to Flink >>>>>>>> and other larger projects. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - Anton >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 4:54 PM Russell Spitzer < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I could see us keeping a deprecated version of the page, but I >>>>>>>>> think the rationale of boosting search engine impacts for blog posts >>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>> are already on the page is actually one of the reasons we should >>>>>>>>> remove the >>>>>>>>> page. As a community we don't want to have a set of "special" blog >>>>>>>>> posts >>>>>>>>> that the project gives special importance. If posts on this page get a >>>>>>>>> boost on search engines that other posts don't get, it makes me a bit >>>>>>>>> nervous. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 11:41 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré < >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It sounds reasonable to me. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> For background, Apache projects have different approaches about >>>>>>>>>> blog: >>>>>>>>>> - some are using blog more like announcements for the projects but >>>>>>>>>> also dependent projects (https://camel.apache.org/blog/) >>>>>>>>>> - some are just listing blog post links related to the project >>>>>>>>>> (https://karaf.apache.org/documentation.html#articles) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The foundation has a blog related to news ( >>>>>>>>>> https://news.apache.org/). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm not a big fan of blog in projects with content (because it's >>>>>>>>>> hard >>>>>>>>>> to maintain and never up to date), but I think it's valuable for >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> community to easily find resources about the projects. >>>>>>>>>> So, just a blog page with links to different blog posts is good >>>>>>>>>> enough >>>>>>>>>> (but it needs some attention to be "maintained"). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Just my $0.01 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>> JB >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 11:03 PM Russell Spitzer >>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > Hi Y'all >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > We talked about this a bit in a community sync a while back and >>>>>>>>>> I know a bunch of committers have >>>>>>>>>> > been working off some of the consensus we reached then but I'm >>>>>>>>>> not sure we ever actually documented >>>>>>>>>> > this. >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > 1. Should the Apache Iceberg community still maintain a set of >>>>>>>>>> Blogs and Talks that are curated on the >>>>>>>>>> > main site by committers and PMC members? >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > The arguments in favor: >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > The current state requires individuals to make decisions on >>>>>>>>>> about inclusion/exclusion of content >>>>>>>>>> > It is very difficult to maintain and keep up to date >>>>>>>>>> > There are lots of blog and talk aggregations for Iceberg >>>>>>>>>> content out there already >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > The arguments against: >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > Have an easy place for folks to find more Iceberg Content >>>>>>>>>> > Have a location to post internal announcements >>>>>>>>>> > ----------- >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > Personally I think we should just drop the blogs site for now >>>>>>>>>> with the option of bringing back an Iceberg >>>>>>>>>> > dev only blog in the future and switch the Talks page to just >>>>>>>>>> link out to the official Youtube channel which mostly >>>>>>>>>> > has entries for Iceberg Summit and our community syncs. >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > ------- >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > 2. Should all vendor/integrations link out to external >>>>>>>>>> documentation rather than having in tree maintained >>>>>>>>>> > documentation? >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > This I think is more straightforward. We have already had a lot >>>>>>>>>> of link-rot and Integration documentation falling behind >>>>>>>>>> > actual integrations. Here I really don't want to break any >>>>>>>>>> previous hard links to Iceberg's docs so I think we should leave >>>>>>>>>> > everything currently in tree, in tree. But for all new >>>>>>>>>> contributions and on any updates to a vendor.md or integration.md we >>>>>>>>>> > should always link out to third party documentation unless we >>>>>>>>>> are documenting something that is actually in the Iceberg >>>>>>>>>> > library (like S3FileIO and friends). >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > Thanks as usual everyone, >>>>>>>>>> > Russ >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > Here is a PR with my suggested changes for the above two points >>>>>>>>>> > https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/14110 >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
