Closed MikeMcC399 closed 1 year ago
PR failed due to HTTP 502 (bad gateway):
[RESPONSE 502] https://plotly.com/ hostname: plotly.com on 'http://localhost:8000/en/science/2021-07-08-science-blog-2'
[RESPONSE 502] https://plotly.com/ hostname: plotly.com on 'http://localhost:8000/en/science/2021-07-08-science-blog-2'
[RESPONSE 502] https://plotly.com/ hostname: plotly.com on 'http://localhost:8000/en/science/2021-07-08-science-blog-2'
retrying.
Repeat attempt was successful - https://github.com/MikeMcC399/cwa-website/actions/runs/4342665533.
This PR is ready for merge.
To other blogs that were updated, like https://www.coronawarn.app/en/blog/2021-12-20-cwa-2-15, an "Updated on" date was added. Should this also be done here?
Yes, that'd be nice. Please also kindly include a short description of what has changed. Please let me know if you do not want to, for any reason - I will take care of it then.
Thank you for your contribution.
@Ein-Tim
To other blogs that were updated, like https://www.coronawarn.app/en/blog/2021-12-20-cwa-2-15, an "Updated on" date was added. Should this also be done here?
The updated-on is already included.
These blog are only of historical interest. The contents are generally inaccurate.
Each change is accompanied by a date and an explanation. Are you expecting more than this? For example:
IMO, this date needs an update:
@Ein-Tim
If you add a date right at the top of the blog which says it has been updated, then it implies that the rest of the blog has value. In fact the rest of the blog is pretty much useless because none of the other test providers are actually working and their websites are still running, but have little or no content.
I added the changed on date in the text for this reason, not to make it prominent and not to suggest that the rest of the article had been reviewed and was in any way accurate or useful.
The motivation for the change was to remove a dead link and allow link testing to be successful.
So if you want to add an "updated" at the top of the article, then you would need to update these other entries as well.
The alternative to taking the bad link out of the article (which is my preferred solution) would be to block the link-checker from checking the domain buergertest.ecocare.center
. That would stop the link test from failing and it would leave the bad link in the blog articles.
I'll leave this to @brianebeling & team to decide! Thank you @MikeMcC399!
Looking good. I think not just removing, but keeping the original link for historical sake is the right call.
I'm traveling right now, the mobile view is.. difficult to work with. You will receive a Review tomorrow, thank you for the PR!
@Ein-Tim
To other blogs that were updated, like coronawarn.app/en/blog/2021-12-20-cwa-2-15, an "Updated on" date was added. Should this also be done here?
The updated-on is already included.
My bad. A date and a description is indeed already there.
When testing I also noticed that the link https://corona-schnelltest-zentren.dm.de/o/dm/login is showing a blank frame, like you mentioned already. I'd suggest that we also add a callout to those links and let the user know that they became non-functional or might not work in the future.
That the other links show mostly "Nicht Verfügbar" or only a few test stations is ok for now. I'd suggest adding a callout to the very top of the page to let the users know that the content may be outdated for those cases. We can't monitor every link all the time. But we can at least prevent some confusion this way.
I'll provide you with some example code for a simple callout that we already made for other parts of the application.
As I'm currently loaded with other tasks and might not get around to it in a timely manner, it'd be much appreciated if we can count on you again - no problem if not - I will get around to it eventually.
@brianebeling
Unfortunately this PR is becoming problematic. Changing the one entry, with the shut-down website, solves one issue, however it leaves the other references uncommented, even though we know that two others are essentially shut down in terms of content as well.
The general principle of blogs is that that they are published and left untouched after publication, unlike FAQ articles which are kept up to date. So if you start editing blogs because they are out of date then you put yourself onto a slippery slope where you would need to edit other similar blogs because their information has become out of date as well.
The reference website for finding test stations is https://map.schnelltestportal.de/. Any general changes about how to find a place to get tested should be announced and shown there. (See also https://github.com/corona-warn-app/cwa-map-public-frontend/issues/35.)
I suggest two alternatives:
buergertest.ecocare.center
to the list of excepted websites which are not checked by the link checker.Closing this PR as the alternative has been merged, I don't want to rule out that we will update the blogs in one way or another, but it seems more likely that they will stay as is.
Thanks for the PR and especially going the additional mile to also provide an alternative!
Dead link to https://buergertest.ecocare.center/#c734 in blogs:
https://www.coronawarn.app/de/blog/2021-05-11-how-to-rapid-test-integration/
https://www.coronawarn.app/de/blog/2021-05-02-corona-warn-app-version-2-1
https://www.coronawarn.app/en/blog/2021-05-02-corona-warn-app-version-2-1
It removes the link https://buergertest.ecocare.center/#c734 from being actively used and adds a note to say that the website is no longer in operation.
This allows
npm run test:links
and the weekly link check to report success again.