robots.txt should steer search engines away from old docs

[smontanaro]

See https://mail.python.org/pipermail/pydotorg-www/2016-November/003921.html for original discussion.

When searching Google for "Python timeit" recently, the first hit was for

https://doc.python.org/2/library/timeit.html

The second hit, unfortunately, was for

https://doc.python.org/3.0/library/timeit.html

The first page of results didn't mention

https://doc.python.org/3/library/timeit.html

at all. It seems that the robots.txt file should be tweaked to strongly discourage search engine crawlers from traversing outdated documentation, at least < 3.2 or < 2.6. It's been a long while since I messed with a robots.txt file (so I won't pretend I could submit a proper PR), but something like

User-agent: *
disallow: /3.0/
disallow: /3.1/
disallow: /2.5/
disallow: /2.4/
disallow: /2.3/
disallow: /2.2/
disallow: /2.1/
disallow: /2.0/

should steer well-behaved crawlers away from obsolete documentation.

[berkerpeksag]

I couldn't find robots.txt in the psf-salt repo. @benjaminp do you know where it is?

[MarkMangoba]

@berkerpeksag i think we can achieve this via Fastly? https://docs.fastly.com/guides/basic-configuration/creating-and-customizing-a-robots-file

[berkerpeksag]

@MarkMangoba good point! Could you please check whether https://docs.python.org/robots.txt is created on Fastly? I don't have a Fastly account so I can't check it myself.

Also, I think we can safely add 3.2 and 3.3 to the list Skip shared in https://github.com/python/pythondotorg/issues/1030#issue-187084143.

[brainwane]

@ewdurbin Is this something we could talk about this week, as we work to close out Python 2 sunsetting communications tasks?

[brainwane]

Hi @JulienPalard -- could you confirm that this is ok to do?

[JulienPalard]

A disallow looks violent, (and dangerous, a typo and boom, I fear robots.txt probably more than I should).

We already have proper canonical links in some builds, like:

$ curl https://docs.python.org/3.6/tutorial/index.html | grep canonical
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://docs.python.org/3/tutorial/index.html" />

they are placed here by Doc/tools/templates/layout.html.

this should be enough to have a /3/ instead of a /3.6/ in search results. But we don't have it for really old docs like 3.4:

$ curl https://docs.python.org/3.4/tutorial/index.html | grep canonical

See also #51.

Using a canonical relation to point from 2.7 to 3 is probably a bad idea: it looks like a lie, and some page have moved (following modules that were renamed or moved), but it could be discussed.

Using a disallow on 2.7 is not a good idea, everyone still has the right to explicitly search for Python 2.7 things in search engines, like python urlparse should give them https://docs.python.org/2/library/urlparse.html (this module does no longer exists in Python 3, it's now https://docs.python.org/3/library/urllib.parse.html).

[enda]

I agree with @JulienPalard, a disallow looks violent and I will always want to find the version 2 in some year if I need it ...

We should let search engines do their job, but maybe we can help them a little:

• By editing the link to v3 "Read the Python documentation for the current stable release." and adding the top keywords in your element:
  For exemple, at https://docs.python.org/2.7/library/functions.html, the link should be something like
  You should upgrade and read the <a href="https://docs.python.org/3/library/functions.html">Built-ins Functions - Python 3 documentation</a>.
  instead of
  You should upgrade and read the <a href="https://docs.python.org/3/library/functions.html"> Python documentation for the current stable release</a>.

• By trying to add a SearchAction markup, pointing only the Python 3 documentation.

• Creating a sitemap only for /3/, adding it in robots.txt and Google SearchConsole Build a sitemap #56

• Pushing from /2/ to /3/ but not from /3/ to /2/

• Found external /2/ links and emails them to change it to /3/ ...

[ewdurbin]

I defer to the Docs team to make a decision on how to move forward here.

Personally I don't see an immediate action that should be taken. Search is hard and I think there are enough little traps described above that this should be approached gradually and with a plan.

[brainwane]

I agree @ewdurbin - should we move this issue perhaps to the CPython repo, or to https://github.com/python/docsbuild-scripts ?

[hugovk]

• Found external /2/ links and emails them to change it to /3/ ...

Here's 95 links on English Wikipedia that begin with https://docs.python.org/2 and and 15 with http://docs.python.org/2.

Not all need to be or should be changed, but I'll do a few now. (Edit: now 80 and 15.)

[JulienPalard]

I'd gladly take the issue on docsbuild-script, but in any cases I won't do disallows in robots.txt.

Thanks a lot @hugovk to try and fix external links, it's a good was as it also helps users, not only search engines 👍

Also please note that the situation already enhanced since 2016, I'm having /fr/3/library/timeit.html first, /3/library/timeit.html 2nd in Google, and I'm having /3/library/timeit.html first on duckduckgo. Did not experimented more. This issue can be closed, reopen as needed on docsbuild scripts if you see SERP clearly lagging behind.

[berkerpeksag]

We have another report showing links to Python 2 docs in python/pythondotorg#1619. I was going to transfer this issue to docsbuild-scripts, but I couldn't find it in the repository list.

[JulienPalard]

(https://github.com/python/docsbuild-scripts/)

[berkerpeksag]

I'm well aware of the location of docsbuild-scripts repository. I was talking about the "transfer issue" feature of GitHub:

[ewdurbin]

Not sure why you were unable to transfer @berkerpeksag, but it has been completed.

[berkerpeksag]

@ewdurbin thank you very much!