Bug 886633

A cursory glance over those files suggests that the majority of links are either:

- In the standardised boilerplate text
- Links to vendor documentation beyond the scope of EAP
- Links to JSRs and other standards.

In the case of the Release Notes document, almost every URL is a link to the various JIRAs for EAP 6.0.0.

If you have an issue with a particular link, please raise an issue against it, and assign it to the guide that it is in. Otherwise, I am closing this as NOTABUG.

According document [1], created by Mike Harvey and Leonard Dimaggio

{quote}
...
Links in Product/Documentation
  Forum - Links for support forum should point to GSS Customer Support Portal or forums maintained by GSS
  Email - Any contact information referenced from the product should be addressed to Red Hat Sales or Support
! Documentation - Any links to documentation should point to official product documentation on redhat.com
  Bug Filing - Any links to filing a bug should point to JIRA or bugzilla corresponding to the product.
  Product Information - Any product information linked from the product should point to jboss.com or redhat.com pages

Documentation
  All documentation should follow the Red Hat formatting/styling requirements
  No README's from the upstream project should be included.
...
{quote}

I am afraid that (for instance) following links do not follow mentioned criteria:
 - http://www.hibernate.org/docs -- we shouldn't link .org pages
 - http://tomcat.apache.org/connectors-doc -- we shouldn't link to community
 - http://www.sonatype.com/people/2009/02/why-putting-repositories-in-your-poms-is-a-bad-idea -- public blog post, content/url can change
 - ...

If you think they does, than please close this issue.


How I got those files:
1. Download single html version of doc. and executed command:
cat ./just-downloaded.html | grep -P '(?!.*href="http://localhost)(?!.*href="http://127.0.0.1)(?!.*href="http[s]?://.*redhat)(?!.*href="http[s]?://.*ELASTIC_IP_OF_APACHE_HTTPD)href="http[s]?://'


[1] JBoss QE Product Release Criteria : https://docspace.corp.redhat.com/docs/DOC-19172

Hey Jan,

As I said, the majority of links are acceptable, because they are either boilerplate text cleared by Red Hat Legal, links to vendor documentation beyond EAP docs scope, JSRs, XSDs, or Release Note JIRAs.

In regard the three links you specifically referred to:

- http://www.hibernate.org/docs

This link is used in a topic that provides a table of information about Hibernate properties. It is used as a link to more information about those properties, which is beyond the scope our scope. This link is acceptable.

- http://tomcat.apache.org/connectors-doc/

This link is used in a topic that mentions the mod_jk connector. This is maintained by Apache, and the docs for it are beyond our scope. This link is acceptable.

- http://www.sonatype.com/people/2009/02/why-putting-repositories-in-your-poms-is-a-bad-idea

This link is not acceptable. It was (from what I can discern), used early in the EAP 6 process as a placeholder for the information in the blog, and then left behind when scope increased/priorities changed. I have created a separate bug for this issue: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=894190

Thank you for drawing my attention to it.

Closing this as NOTABUG.

Hi Tom,

thank you. Ok, I understand. 
Would it be possible to provide me some list of cleared links or smth. like that? I would need it for future checks.