Add aliases to 3.x #129
Add aliases to 3.x #129
Conversation
| @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ | |||
| = Configuration | |||
| :page-aliases: authentication-and-authorization/index.adoc | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think it's necessary to do this here? If you see the live website, this page already has options to the other versions https://neo4j.com/docs/graphql/3/authentication-and-authorization/configuration/
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it's going to the deprecated "Auth" page instead of "Authentication and Authorization" (which is just the nav entry, the first actual page is "Configuration")
checked locally, adding the page-alias unfortunately doesn't get rid of the deprecated "Auth" alias (it's not explicitly stated in that file - how does it work then?)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah yes, you are right about it taking to the deprecated Auth page... but then this was set in the aliases in version 5 already --> https://github.com/neo4j/docs-graphql/edit/5.x/modules/ROOT/pages/authentication-and-authorization/index.adoc
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I might be missing some information here, but this page exists in all versions (3.x, 4.x. 5.x) so adding this alias has no effect on the version selector.
(This alias would also add a redirect from https://neo4j.com/docs/graphql/3/authentication-and-authorization/ to https://neo4j.com/docs/graphql/3/authentication-and-authorization/configuration/ but we discard the redirect files that Antora adds, and use our own redirects, so this also has no effect.)
| @@ -1,5 +1,6 @@ | |||
| [[ogm-api-reference]] | |||
| = API Reference | |||
| :page-aliases: ogm/reference.adoc | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This page is already linked, it has the three versions options in the dropdown menu
There was a problem hiding this comment.
true, but it's the "aggregate" page at the bottom of the navigation in 3.x, instead of the first (which is this API reference).
Checked locally, there's no explicit page-alias for "aggregate" either, so adding the page-alias here won't change anything (again, why is that?)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It might be the same as the previous comment, that in 5.x this page is already an alias to another one... so that's why I think we should only work in the most recent branch and the older ones will catch up? Or they should, like we were discussing... otherwise it might create a conflict between branches
|
closing this PR since 3.x is the earliest version and there should not be aliases in that version for later versions |
No description provided.