> Chris Hostetter wrote: > > : > I think, the outdated docs should be removed from the server to also > > : > disappear from search engines. > > We do not want unofficial builds to be indexed by search engines anyway. > Folks who're searching for information about Lucene should not be > referred to unreleased docuementation on an Apache host that can easily > be confused with official documentation. I am frankly appalled to see > that nightly build documentation still appears at the top of the search > results for queries such as "lucene api". > > We should add a robots.txt for Hudson that prohibits crawling, no? > > Why waste effort on documentation for use only by those very same people > who can easily create their own copy? > > > Alternately, we could turn off the "Publish Javadoc" feature, and > instead > > add trunk/build/docs/api to the list of files to "Archive" and then > start > > refering to a URL like this (doesn't work at the moment) for all the > > javadocs... > > > > http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/view/Lucene/job/Lucene- > trunk/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/trunk/build/docs/api/ > > +1, except the referring part.
Why not refer? A robots.txt is OK, but the docs should be accessible via a link from Hudson and the developer resources page. If search engines do not harvest them, there is no problem with the linking, I think it would be fine. Uwe --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
