tag:rubydoc.tenderapp.com,2010-12-26:/discussions/questions/236-redirecting-ruby-net-ldap-to-net-ldapRubydoc.info: Discussion 2016-07-26T20:45:22Ztag:rubydoc.tenderapp.com,2010-12-26:Comment/356814322015-01-03T00:42:53Z2015-01-03T00:42:55ZRedirecting ruby-net-ldap to net-ldap<div><p>While the ruby-net-ldap gem seems to be an out-of-date copy of
the net-ldap gem, the docs at <a href=
"https://rubygems.org/gems/ruby-net-ldap">https://rubygems.org/gems/ruby-net-ldap</a>,
which are out-of-date as well, show up in (Google) search
results.</p>
<p>I'm working on consolidating these gems and pointing/redirecting
to net-ldap as the canonical gem and docs.</p>
<p>Is there any way to redirect requests for ruby-net-ldap to
net-ldap? How should this be handled?</p>
<p>Thanks!</p></div>Matt Toddtag:rubydoc.tenderapp.com,2010-12-26:Comment/356814322015-01-03T20:23:50Z2015-01-03T20:23:50ZRedirecting ruby-net-ldap to net-ldap<div><p>Until ruby-net-ldap is removed from RubyGems (if that's the
plan), there's no good way for RubyDoc.info to stop serving docs
for this gem. Also note that the versions available for
ruby-net-ldap are different from net-ldap, so there would be no way
to redirect a user looking for 0.0.4 of this gem to net-ldap, as it
stands.</p>
<p>Personally I wouldn't recommend removing the gem since legacy
code might be relying on it. If search results are the only
problem, I would just update links to not refer to this gem and it
will be deprioritized in Google through regular means. If that's
not feasible we could look at adding something to our robots.txt so
Google stops trying to crawl it-- that would be the better approach
IMO.</p></div>lsegaltag:rubydoc.tenderapp.com,2010-12-26:Comment/356814322015-01-03T22:14:09Z2015-01-03T22:14:09ZRedirecting ruby-net-ldap to net-ldap<div><p>Thanks for getting back to me so quickly!</p>
<p>Yeah, ruby-net-ldap was the legacy gem name but hasn't been
maintained since 2006. However, most blogs and tweets and inbound
links go to ruby-net-ldap instead of net-ldap which results in new
users being exposed to (really) old docs and possibly installing
really old versions of the gem. We don't control any of these
links, and many are years old now; it'd be a fools errand trying to
update every last link on the internet pointing to the old gem (at
least, that's what my gut tells me).</p>
<p>I agree, deleting the gem would likely be a bad move. The
robots.txt option sounds like a good first step.</p>
<p>I think on my end, since I <em>just</em> got ownership of the
ruby-net-ldap gem (and realized it was a recurring problem), I
could publish a 0.0.4.1(.final?) which updates docs to point to
net-ldap and include a post-install message (<a href=
"http://guides.rubygems.org/specification-reference/#post_install_message">http://guides.rubygems.org/specification-reference/#post_install_me...</a>).</p>
<p>Aside from that, I'll reach out to the RubyGems team to explore
options.</p></div>Matt Todd