Checklinks CI too noisy

[gabalafou]

Can we remove the checklinks ci or make it optional? We can't control link rot after 3 years

[gabalafou]

The failing check is visible on #137

[krassowski]

You can ignore specific patterns. Probably better than removing it altogether.

[gabalafou]

Idea: log broken links, rather than fail the check?

[gabalafou]

check-links action belongs to Jupyter, should be doable to make it a configuration option whether to fail on broken links or just log them

[bollwyvl]

Some thoughts on getting to :heavy_check_mark: on PRs, while still getting some robustness-over-time on the whole corpus:

• on a nightly job:
  • run the full check
  • show the check as a badge on e.g. the README so someone might see it
• on a PR
  • one of
  • only check against changed files
  • check all files, but ignore_glob: "https?://" to only validate internal links

To improve the overall value use pytest-github-actions-annotate-failures so that the errors show up in the PR

[tonyfast]

closing this cause i turned off the ci a bit ago. if a better option comes a long then we should reopen.

[jtpio]

For reference I originally added the check links check on CI in https://github.com/jupyter/accessibility/pull/118 because it was not possible to find the meeting notes via the docs site.

Maybe you could narrow done the scope of checked links to still check internal links, and ignore external links if these are not stable enough.

[tonyfast]

thanks for the history! if someone spends time reworking the configuration then we should reference this issue in that work.