Where have the old posts gone?

The community has multiple channels of support, as listed here: Communicating and getting help - Fedora Project Wiki

We have 40+ channels on IRC, many of which are bridged now to Telegram. We have an equal if not more number of mailing lists (powered by hyperkitty so one can use the web application to participate). We have presence on Social media where people ask queries. At the end, we also have fedoraforum and Askfedora along with the many regional support web-applications. All of these have dedicated channels for Q&A that users can use.

So, pardon me but I don’t understand where the impression that we’re downlplaying it comes from.

If anything, we struggle because we constantly try to have channels everywhere and that spreads us rather thin. So I would encourage everyone here to please be present on multiple channels to help the sub-communities there.

1 Like

Maybe I am missing smth, but from

Fedora Infrastructure does not have a way to do either of these tasks. We do not run either service and have no way to put in redirects in either place.

it looks like Fedora Infra team doesn’t manage the ask site. Thus it cannot be done by them, but it doesn’t mean it cannot be done at all.

You still run the ask site behind smth, which resolves https certificates. Who manages nginx- or the whatever-proxy config for it? How is it deployed, Openshift?

1 Like

Discourse hosts it for us. We can ask them, but our business plan seems to have limited features.

It’s a real shame that Ask Fedora decided to delete every user contribution. Some of us had put a lot of time and effort into that! The community has lost a great resource.

Could an admin please get in touch with the Internet Archive to archive everything on the old URLs so there will be a way to still get to them in the future. The old questions are linked to form all over the web.

1 Like

Have you looked to see if they’re there now?

In any case, I have an additional suggestion, half-baked because I don’t know how feasible it is, but it has potential to be a good user experience. Could the 404 handler be amended to check the IA for the nonexistent url automatically, and if it’s found, offer this up to the user as a clickable link?

[ Edit: I just checked a random couple of old ask urls, and they were already in the archive. There’s also this which may be of use: https://blog.archive.org/2013/10/24/web-archive-404-handler-for-webmasters/ ]

1 Like

Please read the replies on this post to learn of the reasons, and current status.

@FranciscoD Now it explains a lot…

I would still suggest contact discourse team and get it fixed. They have some tools to do it, for example permalinks https://meta.discourse.org/t/custom-permalinks/56867 Even though these tools are a bit limited, they can at least suggest something.

At the very list, all /questions/ url could be redirected to a post which explains how to find the old data on the askbot-site.


It’s on our list, will hopefully have the time to investigate it in detail soonish.

This is absolutely, 100%, without a doubt, what must be done, and fast. Host Discourse on a dedicated system somewhere if necessary to get it done. There is massive amount of critical content that must be preserved! Example: This morning I couldn’t boot my Fedora system due to a broken initramfs. I needed access to content on the old site to find the solution and ended up at a 404 error on this site with no way to get to the content on the “new” URL.

Sadly, it seems the transition was not planned out well, and the Fedora project is going to suffer irrepubable harm as a result. People will surely leave for other distributions because they can’t find the answers they need. These important links are already falling outof search indexes because the URL’s are now all 404 errors. Just ask the W3C, the leader of the World Wide Web standard: “Cool URI’s don’t change.”


Did you ask a question about your query, which is what this platform is for?

Thanks for your comments. The transition was planned out—please read the other posts to see the limitations that needed to be dealt with.

Or they’ll ask new questions, get them solved, and happily proceed with their lives :slight_smile:

The important links are on fedora quick-docs. The rest are individual cases which while do apply to multiple users sometimes, tend to rely heavily on softawre and fedora versions. No solutions that were provided for Fedora 29 or earlier versions are guaranteed to work for Fedora 30 and future versions. So please, you, like everyone else, are better off asking a fresh question.

This is the #site-feedback category, so my reply to the topic continued the feedback about the site. My question had already been answered on the old site, so no, I’m not going to ask it again. I just wanted to be able to get to my answer that was already there.

In other words, there were limitations that weren’t dealt with. How exactly is that not lack of planning before executing the transition?

Forcing people to ask new questions, and wait for resposnes, rather than have access to the knowledge already created is presumptuous and rude, as seems to be the tone in all of your replies to the constructive criticism offered here.

People need to solve problems quickly and not wait around, and the tools for them to solve those questions are on the old site that is quickly being wiped off the face of the Internet.

“Important” as judged by whom? And by what process?

Maybe, maybe not. That doesn’t reduce the usefulness of having the old material. In my case, once I was able to dig up my answer on the old site, I just had to edit the kernel version and it worked. Again, such a presumptious attitude suggests poor planning and lack of understand of the use cases for people looking for content on Ask Fedora.

Again, this is the #site-feedback category. Asking new questions aren’t on topic in this category.

1 Like

I meant about the query that lead you to run into a 404—not a new query about the old forum :wink:

The limitations have been outlined in this and other discussions about the move. Please suggest your solutions as to how these limitations could be dealt with—we’re always looking to improve.

I recommend you read the code of conduct again, and question yourself as to whether you are trying to “be excellent to each other” here.

But lots of people are quite happy to wait around, engage with others, and solve their problems. Maybe we’re projecting our requirements on to others in general?

By the metrics that were possible to gather from askbot—which weren’t many. There’s another limitation we worked with. Can you suggest a solution please?

Maybe, maybe not works both ways. While it has worked for you here, it wouldn’t in a lot of cases. Given the development pace of Fedora, it is more likely that information on previous releases will not apply to newer ones.

Let’s be clear about this—you questioning the attitude of people that spent hours and hours planning and working on this move is not acceptable. Please read the code of conduct and learn to be more understanding of other’s efforts.

Why, if our work is so below your standards, you are quite welcome to set up a new forum and help people out that way. The Fedora communtiy welcomes users helping others, in whatever way they see fit.

Again, a question on the query that you were looking for an answer to—not a documentation of your personal frustrations. :slight_smile:

Let’s come back to this. On the initial setup:

  • somewhere? Where?
  • who will provide the hardware for this hosting?
  • who will provide the manpower for the initial setup of the system, and Discourse deployment?

On the migration of data:

  • who will extract a datadump from askbot? (also hosted by askbot for us)
  • who will clean and pre-process it to make it fit for importing into Discourse?
  • who will figure out how it will be imported into Discourse?
  • who will figure out if the data needs to be anonymised?
  • will the users and their karma also be imported? How so?
  • will these users be connected to users on discourse? Can they be?

When that is done:

  • who will provide the manpower for constant maintenance of this hosting?
  • who will ensure the security of this instance?

The overarching questions:

  • who will finance all of this?


  • all the resources that go in here: can they be used better elsewhere?

Well, I’ve tried to set up “/en” to redirect to “askbot.fp.o/en”, but I’m not sure if it works. It’s all that we can do from the admin panel.

We have contacted discourse about one or two things already like modifying the 404 page to mention askbot.fp.o, but there’s not much that can be done on the current plan (which is limited by the finances of the community budget).

Hence, “limitations”. :slightly_frowning_face:

1 Like

This doesn’t seem to work.

This has a better message now, mentioning askbot.

1 Like

I was unaware of all but Askfedora and fedoraforum. I didn’t even realize the latter is an official part of Fedora.

I doubt I’m an exception in my level of awareness of Fedora resources.

Perhaps you realize the problem then.

Would it not be more effective and efficient to have fewer but more populated resource channels? Over-specialization of resources creates silos and lower levels of activity in each and in total. Especially when they do not attain a critical mass, which becomes more difficult.

Is the number of posts and threads asking about the disappearance of the old askfedora posts not an indication? Surely you must be tired of repeating yourself.

Oh the irony.

But this is a good opportunity to use the wonderful polling feature of Discourse. How do you prefer to use Ask Fedora?

1 Like

I do—most of us do, but let me try to explain the nature the issue. Have you ever wondered why there are thousands of Linux distributions instead of a few that the Free software community focuses their efdorts on?

It is a feature of a volunteer based community where everyone is allowed, encouraged rather, to do things their own way. You get people to join you not by an order, but by convincing them to put aside their pet project to spend time on yours. So while you will have a a large proportion doing the popular thing, you will always have small pockets doing their own thing.

It is small compared to the number of posts not on this subject. Even you can see that.

I take the trouble of repeating myself try to convince people of our plan (as explained above convincing is half the job), and hoping that itll also convince them to turn into volunteers.

It not ironic. You do realise that we admins have access to usage metrics for this platform? There are now about 600 users here, and on then outside maybe 30 have spent their time discussing this?

To what end though? I’ve listed the limitations we are working within—will a poll make them go away?

The only thing that may help is more users joining the community and volunteering with tasks and projects, i.e., increasing the man power we have at our disposal.

Forgot to link to this: Communicating and getting help - Fedora Project Wiki


It’s linked in the “Get help” bit in the footer of the website too. Perhaps a new topic on how its visibility can be improved would be worth a discussion?

You’re beating a dead horse - (distinctly authoritarian) minds have been made up.


That is not a helpful comment, and you are not being excellent to us when you say that. Can you at least try? You said youd try to be productive—is that productive?

How about going through the list of limitations and suggesting solutions instead of calling us names?? Suggest one solution?

1 Like