Renamed a page, old page still exists?

lc's Avatar

lc

01 Mar, 2011 03:16 PM

Many links on our site point to an index page, then the page's content was revamped, and the folder name was changed.
I assumed either links would be broken or they would point to the new folder name, as the path is still the same up until the folder name. But instead all links on our site still point to the old page, using the old path and the old content. How is it linking if that content has been erased and the page has been renamed? And how do I get rid of it?

  1. 1 Posted by Amy on 10 Mar, 2011 05:13 PM

    Amy's Avatar

    When you move or rename a page, we typically recommend that you unpublish the page first from the web server. If it was moved/renamed without an unpublish first, then it's possible that you now have both the old file and the new file on the web server, which would explain why pages with the old link still work.

    Second, Cascade Server does indeed have full link management which will update your links to the new name/location of the page you changed. However, while those links are updated within the system, the changes will not take place on the live site until those affected pages are republished out. This is due to the system's "push" architecture, whereby flat static files are published out.

    I hope one or both of these items help answer your question.

  2. 2 Posted by jerry.zaryczny on 13 Jul, 2011 10:26 PM

    jerry.zaryczny's Avatar

    We're currently on version: 6.7.6 - e89f1

    When using "Delete" on a file, there is a pre-selected checkbox called "Un-publish Content" which automatically unpublishes the file.

    On the "Move | Rename", this "Un-publish Content" checkbox does not exist, instead there is a red message which reads:

    Moving/renaming this asset may cause it to be out of sync on the following Destinations. To avoid this problem, unpublish this asset first.

    We have a few dozen content managers and unfortunately not all of them will un-publish content before renaming or moving folders or files, so we will acquire these orphans files/directories.

    Do you know when will the pre-selected "Un-publish Content" checkbox feature become available in the "Move | Rename" function?

    or

    Does there currently exist a workflow that we can implement so that this "un-publish content" functionality exists?

  3. Support Staff 3 Posted by Tim on 14 Jul, 2011 12:55 PM

    Tim's Avatar

    Hi Jerry,

    To answer your questions:

    Do you know when will the pre-selected "Un-publish Content" checkbox feature become available in the "Move | Rename" function?

    I don't believe this specific feature is currently planned. However, this idea on our Idea exchange seems to be some functionality in which you would be interested. That particular idea is currently under review by our engineering team and is being considered for one of our next major releases. Please be sure to vote/comment on that item!

    Does there currently exist a workflow that we can implement so that this "un-publish content" functionality exists?

    Unfortunately there isn't a workflow trigger available which will do this for you. The closest thing would be to use the Unpublish and Delete Trigger, but that - of course - will also remove the asset from the system (which you do not want).

    Let me know if you have any further questions.

    Thanks!

  4. 4 Posted by jerry.zaryczny on 14 Jul, 2011 03:33 PM

    jerry.zaryczny's Avatar

    Tim,

    Thanks for the response, you are appreciated.

  5. Support Staff 5 Posted by Tim on 14 Jul, 2011 03:40 PM

    Tim's Avatar

    You bet!

  6. Tim closed this discussion on 14 Jul, 2011 03:40 PM.

  7. jerry.zaryczny re-opened this discussion on 14 Jul, 2011 04:47 PM

  8. 6 Posted by jerry.zaryczny on 14 Jul, 2011 04:47 PM

    jerry.zaryczny's Avatar

    Tim - Since it doesn't look like this feature will be available any time soon, can you tell us how other schools/organizations are dealing with the issue of orphaned content?

    Specifically, it seems that once search engines find the content originally by spidering, they return to it directly to check for updates. Obviously, once a file is orphaned it is no longer being updated and if still indexed in search engines, providing erroneous data.

    Right now we simply delete and re-publish all CMS content quarterly, but we'd like a better way. What would you suggest?"

  9. 7 Posted by Sean on 20 Jul, 2011 01:53 AM

    Sean's Avatar

    Hi Tim (or anyone else) - Any chance of an update on Jerry's last question?

    Thanks!

  10. 8 Posted by jerry.zaryczny on 01 Aug, 2011 09:32 PM

    jerry.zaryczny's Avatar

    Anyone? Bueller?

  11. 9 Posted by jeff.walberg on 24 Oct, 2011 01:51 PM

    jeff.walberg's Avatar

    Jerry asked the exact two questions I would ask. Orphan files are a huge problem for us right now, mostly because of the way Move/Rename works. If there isn't a good solution in the software, I would like to know a best practice for removing orphan files after the fact.

    One method we're working on is to embed a date stamp within each page published by the CMS. If we update this date stamp and republish the site, we can use a simple command line script based on findstr to identify live pages that were created with an older date stamp. These pages are presumably either no longer in the CMS or not set to publish, otherwise they would have overwritten with a newer date stamp. Once we gain some confidence that this scheme identifies only pages we'd like to remove, we should be able to write another script to delete them all.

    I would like to know if there are other approaches that others are using successfully, though.

  12. 10 Posted by Charlie Holder on 02 Apr, 2012 01:09 AM

    Charlie Holder's Avatar

    Wanted to send an update related to this thread.

    Our latest release of Cascade Server, the 7.0 release that is in beta, will have this "Unpublish content" checkbox on the Move/Rename tab.

    Hopefully you've seen this update and have been able to weigh in on it here in the Idea Exchange or here on our Feedback forum.

    Thanks for your patience with improvements to the product and I hope this update helps. Let me know if there's more you'd like to discuss!
    Thanks.

  13. Charlie Holder closed this discussion on 02 Apr, 2012 01:09 AM.

  14. jerry.zaryczny re-opened this discussion on 15 Jan, 2015 10:51 PM

  15. 11 Posted by jerry.zaryczny on 15 Jan, 2015 10:51 PM

    jerry.zaryczny's Avatar
  16. Tim closed this discussion on 15 Jan, 2015 10:58 PM.

Comments are currently closed for this discussion. You can start a new one.

Keyboard shortcuts

Generic

? Show this help
ESC Blurs the current field

Comment Form

r Focus the comment reply box
^ + ↩ Submit the comment

You can use Command ⌘ instead of Control ^ on Mac