Thank you, Dan!

How would people feel about changing the breadcrumbs from the way they are
now (which link back to the most recent pages you've been to) to
hierarchical breadcrumbs? My thought is that if people land in a page
inside the wiki from a google search, hierarchical breadcrumbs would give
them better context.

Terran McCanna
PINES Program Manager
Georgia Public Library Service
1800 Century Place, Suite 150
Atlanta, GA 30345

On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Wells <> wrote:

> Hello all,
> As part of my (glacially slow) attempts to move the dev docs project over
> to the main wiki, I spent a few days right before the conference doing some
> cleanup of the main wiki.  Here are a few things worth noting about that
> process:
> 1) There is a new namespace for "archiving" pages with no current
> relevancy and limited or no historical value.  This namespace is
> "zzz_archive".  Pages in this space *will not* show up in searches or the
> site map, but they *will* still be able to be browsed and read.  The only
> way to find and reach them is via the archive index,
> .  This page
> (via a few plugins) provides both an alphabetical index and also a tree
> view of the archive contents.  At last count, around 90 pages are now in
> this archive.  I tried to err on the side of leaving things in place, but
> if something ended up in the archive and you feel it is still generally
> useful, please feel free to move it out again.
> 2) There is another new namespace for pages with limited current
> relevancy, but with some historical interest.  As you might guess, such
> pages now reside in the "history" namespace.  This space is currently
> around 20 pages, mostly older release notes (before separate docs).
> Perhaps we'll decide this distinction between "archive" and "history"
> isn't meaningful, but it might be useful to give an example to illustrate
> the distinction I am making.  Consider two existing pages, the upgrade
> instructions for Evergreen version 1.4, and the release notes / feature
> list for version 1.4.  We can safely assume very few people still need
> step-by-step instructions for upgrading from 1.2 to 1.4.  On the other
> hand, it is more interesting, and in some cases even useful, to know which
> features came in version 1.4.  As it stands, the upgrade instructions are
> archived, and the feature list has been moved to "history".
> 3) For pages being archived, most were so old and so specific, it did not
> seem like any kind of redirect would be worth the maintenance cost.
> However, for pages moved to "history", and for a few other pages moved and
> re-ordered more generally, it is useful to keep any outside links working
> (internal links are rewritten in the move process anyway).  To this end, I
> installed a very basic redirect plugin to handle the mapping of old to
> new.  Unfortunately, due to a miscommunication, those redirects were all
> deleted, but I am in the process of recreating them, and expect to have
> them in place again by the end of the week.
> 4) Moving forward, based on the kinds of cleanup which were necessary, I
> would suggest the following *general* guidelines:
> - Try not to make pages in the root.  We have many namespaces, and your
> page probably fits somewhere.  Consult the Sitemap for help and inspiration.
> - Try not to make a new namespace.  We had quite a few namespaces with
> exactly one page in them.  It's easy to believe your new page will the
> start of something great, but it might be better to put the page in an
> existing namespace until perhaps three or four pages coalesce into a new
> useful grouping.
> Sincerely,
> Dan

Reply via email to