Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add a new support document as a landing page for URLs in old support … #1264

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Feb 19, 2025

Conversation

thomas-zimmerman
Copy link
Contributor

…messages to allow both an explanation
and quick way to open support ticket if they still need help.

@burden I would like to have the redirect for https://system76.com/my-account/ticket/# to land on this support article.

I would like to have some additional eyes on the language as I've got this pretty bare bones at the moment.

@jacobgkau jacobgkau requested a review from a team December 20, 2024 18:11

---

<!--
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This does not seem to be a standard footer for all of the articles. Versioning and authorship information are already tracked via Git. Having it in the article's text adds an additional maintenance burden. Do we need to have this here?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it's good to keep. If this content moves to odoo, we would loose the github tracking for credit

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If the support site is migrated to Odoo, "credit" can be added at that time if it's needed. Nothing from the git history will be "lost" until all copies of the repository are deleted.

I still don't see why it would be needed even if that were the case-- we've had this discussion before regarding sticking names at the bottom of articles, and come away not recognizing it as necessary (ditto for doc version, and also for date, which we have an entire plugin installed just to present on the current live site).

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I've gone ahead and removed it. I want to reiterate, you guys can add that stuff back if & when the docs are migrated to another platform. For now, authorship & date/version info are not only tracked in git but are presented at the bottom of the page by our Nuxt plugins/config.

@thomas-zimmerman
Copy link
Contributor Author

Updated to respond to comments. Waiting on lint checks to pass.

Copy link
Member

@burden burden left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

URL has changed. The old URL redirects. No worries if you don't want to update November tho.

burden
burden previously approved these changes Jan 16, 2025
@jacobgkau
Copy link
Member

@thomas-zimmerman Did you skip the four comments that GitHub hid by default on purpose, or did you not notice they were there? It doesn't look like they've been addressed. You can disagree with them if you'd like, but I wanted to make sure.

Screenshot from 2025-01-16 15-29-34

image

@thomas-zimmerman
Copy link
Contributor Author

No, that was me missing them in the github UI; I'll take a look and make sure to address them tomorrow.

@thomas-zimmerman
Copy link
Contributor Author

...and should have update for all of the outstanding bits here.

burden
burden previously approved these changes Jan 23, 2025
Copy link
Member

@burden burden left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm
@jacobgkau what do you think?

@jacobgkau jacobgkau force-pushed the new-web-infrastructure-landing branch from c140767 to 7f6c018 Compare February 5, 2025 05:25
Copy link
Member

@jacobgkau jacobgkau left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sorry, didn't realize this had been waiting on me. I made a few more tweaks. The current version is acceptable from my perspective as QA.

Copy link
Member

@ahoneybun ahoneybun left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM minus that one note about the hidden value.

facebookImage: /_social/article
twitterImage: /_social/article

hidden: true
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I suspect this is on purpose?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think that's so it doesn't show up in the list, since it's meant as a landing page and isn't necessarily useful to be browsed.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That's what I was thinking so this PR is good then.

@leviport leviport merged commit fa0b585 into master Feb 19, 2025
3 checks passed
@leviport leviport deleted the new-web-infrastructure-landing branch February 19, 2025 17:50
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.

5 participants