| 11:23 | <annevk> | yoav: it seems https://github.com/WICG/webappsec-feature-policy was incorrectly moved |
| 11:23 | <annevk> | yoav: old links are now in fact broken |
| 11:23 | <annevk> | yoav: my GitHub notifications for instance pointed me to https://github.com/WICG/webappsec-feature-policy/issues/263 and various other issues which are all 404s |
| 11:25 | <annevk> | yoav: links from the HTML Standard such as https://wicg.github.io/feature-policy/#policy-controlled-feature are also broken |
| 11:26 | <Ms2ger> | \o/ |
| 11:27 | <annevk> | I'm glad I already said happy new year earlier on 😊 |
| 12:12 | <yoav> | annevk: hmm |
| 12:12 | <yoav> | the issue links were broken because we tried to conserve the gh pages links |
| 12:13 | <yoav> | so we created a "redirection repo" |
| 12:13 | <yoav> | but that's not ideal... |
| 12:15 | <yoav> | it would be great if all redirections were automatically taken care of by GH |
| 13:15 | <yoav> | annevk: unrelated, but I'd appreciate a review for https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/9307 |
| 13:21 | <annevk> | yoav: but the gh pages links are also broken? |
| 13:22 | <annevk> | yoav: that PR looks incorrectly rebased, which makes it hard to review |
| 13:22 | <yoav> | annevk: there were a couple of renames, one from "feature-policy" to "webappsec-feature-policy" and another to the W3C org |
| 13:22 | <yoav> | annevk: you're right. fixing |
| 13:27 | <annevk> | yoav: surely the longstanding feature-policy name is the one for which the redirects ought to work |
| 13:27 | <annevk> | yoav: in particular as now the HTML Standard is broken |
| 13:27 | <annevk> | yoav: and any archived copy thereof |
| 13:27 | <yoav> | annevk: Sure. (and not mutually exclusive) |
| 13:27 | <yoav> | I'll fix it now |
| 13:31 | <yoav> | annevk: Added a redirection repo for the feature-policy name, and it seems to be working |
| 13:32 | <yoav> | please verify that you see the same from your end |
| 13:35 | <annevk> | yoav: it redirects to https://github.com/WICG/webappsec-feature-policy/issues/263 which fails |
| 13:35 | <annevk> | yoav: the non-issue link does work |
| 13:36 | <yoav> | annevk: yeah, I'm not sure how to make sure that issues redirection continue to work when we need to create redirection repos (which have the same name) |
| 13:39 | <annevk> | yoav: usually there's a separate repo that manages the github.io site, which creates some other problems of course, but... |
| 13:39 | <annevk> | yoav: this at least makes me hugely skeptical of taking on dependencies on WICG stuff going forward |
| 13:42 | <yoav> | annevk: please don't turn this into a bigger issue than the technical problem that it is. If you have suggestions on better ways to move repos around, we'd be happy to hear them. If there are things in our process that we can do to prevent this in the future, we'd be happy to look into that as well. |
| 13:45 | <annevk> | yoav: I'd appreciate if you don't put the burden on me, thanks |
| 13:47 | <annevk> | But basically, if the issue of breaking issue links remains, it seems problematic and not just technical in nature, as it'll make it very hard to figure out what actually went on and why things were decided the way they were |
| 14:04 | <yoav> | annevk: I'm not arguing that it's not an issue needs resolving (it definitely is). I'm just not sure how to perform any repo migration in GH which supports both issue redirects and anchor redirects. This is a technical problem that we'd need to figure out (e.g. by asking GH to fix redirections, by changing the way migrations are done if our current process is needlessly breaking links that could be preserved, etc) |
| 14:08 | <annevk> | yoav: I mentioned one way, which is that you manage your website as a separate repo |
| 14:08 | <annevk> | yoav: that works and has been successfully used by other groups |
| 14:16 | <yoav> | yeah, we could create an abstraction layer above gh-pages as long as the specs are in incubation, to control the link redirection ourselves, and not need the redirection repos. that would be one option to tackle this |
| 15:18 | <Domenic> | It's not an abstraction layer above GitHub pages |
| 15:18 | <Domenic> | It's just a single website repo |
| 15:18 | <Domenic> | https://gist.github.com/domenic/1f286d415559b56d725bee51a62c24a7 |
| 15:18 | <annevk> | hsivonen: happy new year, Web NFC might have a UTF-16 encoder (unclear LE/BE) dependency: https://github.com/w3c/web-nfc/pull/186 |
| 16:46 | <yoav> | Domenic: that seems largely what we do (only we use JS based redirections to maintain anchors in redirected links) |
| 16:46 | <yoav> | does that preserve links to issues in your case? |
| 16:47 | <yoav> | (as the new repo for the redirection GH pages overrides the name of the moved repo, no?_ |
| 16:47 | <yoav> | ) |
| 17:01 | <Domenic> | yoav: yes, because there's no redirection repo per spec |
| 17:01 | <Domenic> | So nothing squats on the WICG/feature-policy namespace |
| 17:01 | <Domenic> | Letting GitHub handle the redirects as it should |
| 17:04 | <yoav> | oh! I wasn't aware of user gh pages. That seems like a better way to go indeed (and simpler to manage) |
| 17:04 | <yoav> | I wonder if killing the squating repos will bring back redirections |
| 17:04 | <yoav> | (for the issues) |
| 17:17 | <Domenic> | My guess is you'll need to do a re-transfer and transfer back, and/or contact GitHub |
| 18:05 | <yoav> | Domenic & annevk: redirections restored for both issues as well as spec links/anchors |
| 18:05 | <Domenic> | \o/ |
| 18:05 | <yoav> | Domenic: thanks for pointing our GH user pages. Super helpful! :) |
| 18:06 | <Domenic> | :) |
| 18:06 | <annevk> | yoav: that’s great, thanks |
| 18:06 | <Zegnat> | Out of pure curiosity: did you document how you fixed it, yoav? Did you need to transfer back and forth again? |
| 18:07 | <yoav> | Zegnat: Just deleted the squatting repo and redirections were back. No unnecessary transfers needed |
| 18:09 | <Zegnat> | That’s good to know! 👍 |
| 19:23 | <devsnek> | is there any public data on how much usage ajax.googleapis.com gets |