incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kay Schenk <kay.sch...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: investigation using Google Webmaster tools
Date Thu, 02 Aug 2012 21:31:27 GMT
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2wave@comcast.net> wrote:

> Sorry to top post, but this week I am at my work HQ and am busy.
>
> I think that we should create a 404 page and then ask infra to point to
> that.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>

@Dave

Well this would help in being nicer about "missing" items. We could get
them to do a search or something else -- give them a few hints I guess.

Right now, except for the CVEs which all "bad" links reference in the wrong
location, and the "old" servlet business, I'm not seeing any easy patterns
that would help with 62000+ bad links.


> On Aug 1, 2012, at 7:45 PM, Kay Schenk <kay.schenk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On 08/01/2012 04:29 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> >> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:06 PM, Kay Schenk <kay.schenk@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>> Hello all --
> >>>
> >>> I am exploring the www.openoffice.site using the Google Webmaster tool
> that
> >>> Rob told us about on Jul 19.
> >>>
> >>> I am ONLY getting started by looking at the 62,962 404 errors (!!!!!)
> >>>
> >>> Many of these are links to VERY old docs which we no longer have --
> like
> >>> source trees for 1.0.1, 1.0.2 etc.--  or have to do with the OLD
> >>> architecture -- servlet references etc.
> >>>
> >>
> >> If I understand this correctly, Google is looking at links on
> >> webpages, not just our webpages, but also links from 3rd party
> >> websites, and if they point to an openoffice.org page that doesn't
> >> exist, it shows up on this list.   This could happen for any reason.
> >> In some cases the original link might have had a typo.
> >
> > yes, this is correct, and you are right about this too...some of the
> 404s reference pages we probably NEVER had.
> >
> >>
> >>> Some of this issues could be solved with rather extensive use of sym
> links
> >>> (yes, you can actually use these in svn -- kind of) and of course some
> not
> >>> -- many missing old security bulletins.
> >>>
> >>
> >> For the security bulletins, I wonder if this is actually a redirection
> >> error.  We have many of them here:
> >>
> >> http://www.openoffice.org/security/bulletin.html
> >
> > ah...yes, they are there...the problem is we would need to construct a
> LOT of just "redirect" pages to right some of these since they all seem to
> have the form
> >
> > "/security/cvs-bulletin-number".html
> >
> >>
> >> But we're redirecting security.openoffice.org to
> >> http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/security.html
> >>
> >> So if there are outstanding URL's that are of the form
> >> security.openoffice.org/foo.html then they might be broken now.
> >
> > see above...it's the actual placement of the bulletins within the tree
> that's the problem I think
> >
> >
> >>
> >>> So, to those of you using this tool, I may mark many of these as
> "fixed".
> >>> Of course they are not -- and they may show up again. Some of them only
> >>> show up in BZ issues!! (Google is amazingly thorough).
> >>>
> >>> I don't know how long it will take for them to "show up" again. The
> problem
> >>> is some of these are very very very old references, and not likely we
> can
> >>> do anything about at this point in time.
> >>> If you're not using this tool, you probably don't care about this. If
> you
> >>> are using it, and have another opinion before I start chunking away at
> >>> hiding these, please weigh in.
> >>>
> >>
> >> The way I understand it the links at the top of the list are the ones
> >> Google considers the most important.  I think this is based on the
> >> number of links to that page.  Maybe they factor in other things as
> >> well.  So I'd recommend looking more at the top 100 or so broken
> >> links, make this a manageable task.
> >
> > Well the problem is "how" to make it manageable... :(
> >
> >>
> >> Or -- and here is a challenge for the algorithm experts -- maybe there
> >> is an easy way to take that entire list of 62,962 links and determine
> >> what the top base paths are that are broken.
> >
> > if only this were so :( They're all over the place.
> >
> > In other words, if the
> >> links are:
> >>
> >> foo.openoffice.org/bar/baz1
> >> foo.openoffice.org/bar/baz2
> >> foo.openoffice.org/bar/baz2
> >> foo.openoffice.org/bar2/baz1
> >> foo2.openoffice.org/bar1/baz1
> >>
> >> Then this would tell us that foo.openoffice.org/bar/* was a top source
> >> of broken links.  This might indicate important patterns of where the
> >> most broken links are.
> >>
> >> It seems like this could be done via a prefix tree (a "trie"):
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trie
> >>
> >> Maybe other (simpler) ways as well.
>
>
> > I'll look at this article. It's a daunting task any way you look at it.
> >
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >
> > What happens when things get moved a LOT with no regard for the end
> user. Don't get me started on the ways I've had to deal with this in the
> past.
> >
> >>
> >> -Rob
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> MzK
> >>>
> >>> "I'm just a normal jerk who happens to make music.
> >>>  As long as my brain and fingers work, I'm cool."
> >>>                               -- Eddie Van Halen
> >
> > --
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > MzK
> >
> > "I'm just a normal jerk who happens to make music.
> > As long as my brain and fingers work, I'm cool."
> >                              -- Eddie Van Halen
> >
> >
>



-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK

"I'm just a normal jerk who happens to make music.
 As long as my brain and fingers work, I'm cool."
                              -- Eddie Van Halen

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message