Skip to content

Conversation

@johnsmartco
Copy link

No description provided.

## Documentation

The most up-to-date documentation is available [online][onlineDocs].
The most up-to-date documentation is available [online](https://docs.datastax.com/en/dsbulk/docs/1.9.0/dsbulkAbout.html).
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Since you are inlining the link, please remove the "footpage link" at the bottom of the page:

[onlineDocs]:https://docs.datastax.com/en/dsbulk/doc/

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Also, couldn't we avoid hard-coding 1.9 in the URL? E.g. by using a "latest" redirect?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Regarding the /latest/ instead of /1.9.0/, that proposed scheme was objected to by a prior generation of doc leads. Something about customers assuming their version was the "latest" and complained to Support that they couldn't get a doc'd feature (introduced in a more recent release) to work. For the moment I'll need to hardcode the /1.9.0/ but you raise a fair point.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes will remove the [onlineDocs] reference from the footer. Thanks for spotting it.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I understand the customers objections. But in the present case, we are considering DSBulk's own in-tree README file. Moreover, the link is being described as "the most up-to-date documentation". If we hard-code 1.9.0 here, the README file and this description will become outdated as soon as we publish a 1.10 release. Are we sure this is what we want?

@johnsmartco johnsmartco requested a review from adutra July 29, 2022 17:02
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants