[Bug]: Introduction title lost

[yurishkuro]

What happened?

Previously the first page's title was Introduction. Now it says Docs(2.6), which is less informative

Steps to reproduce

make develop on main

Expected behavior

git checkout 42e8127
make develop

Relevant log output

Screenshot

No response

Additional context

No response

Jaeger backend version

No response

SDK

No response

Pipeline

No response

Stogage backend

No response

Operating system

No response

Deployment model

No response

Deployment configs

[chalin]

That index page is now the root of the versioned-docs page:

IMHO, it makes more sense to use the "Docs (X.Y)" title in this case.

[yurishkuro]

I fixed it for the current website ff40c08. The page itself logically is an Introduction.

I don't think the left menu requires "2.6" root - we're not going to have 2.5 below it, the version selection should be less invasive, with a dropdown as we have today, and the current version can be just a label in the page:

[chalin]

I fixed it for the current website ff40c08. The page itself logically is an Introduction.

Ok.

I don't think the left menu requires "2.6" root - we're not going to have 2.5 below it, the version selection should be less invasive, with a dropdown as we have today,

Right, as I mentioned before, this is WIP, using Docsy "as is". We can discuss later when it comes to choosing which Docsy layouts we want to override. Keep in mind that each override has an extra maintenance cost that makes Docsy upgrades more of an effort over time.

I'll have something to propose later.

[yurishkuro]

do you have an example of "default" way docsy does versioning? I see that k8s does it via subdomains.

[chalin]

@yurishkuro - I answered via #892 (comment).

[yurishkuro]

But it doesn't answer my question since it seems we need to make a directional decision about the files organization in order for you to progress with docsy prototype. At the same time we need to make sure the existing website's AI is still sensible.

Looking at etcd, their _index docs that carry the version number are not the same as our intro pages, they are just a placeholder for the docs structure. So we can do the same if it makes things easier, i.e. rename _index.md to intro.md and add new _index.md that just has the version title and links to subpages.

[chalin]

But it doesn't answer my question since it seems we need to make a directional decision about the files organization in order for you to progress with docsy prototype. At the same time we need to make sure the existing website's AI is still sensible.

Right. Thought, to be clear, I'm not blocked on progressing with the Docsy port.

Looking at etcd, their _index docs that carry the version number are not the same as our intro pages, they are just a placeholder for the docs structure. So we can do the same if it makes things easier, i.e. rename _index.md to intro.md and add new _index.md that just has the version title and links to subpages.

Yes, that could work too! I take note of your preference.

I still feel that the current _index pages feel more like doc-version landing pages to me, but we don't need to make a final decision until later IMHO.