Skip to content

Conversation

avivkeller
Copy link
Member

  1. Unless instructed otherwise, we should assume that UTM parameters are required. See https://openjs-foundation.slack.com/archives/CVAMEJ4UV/p1750546862196709?thread_ts=1750198935.143539&cid=CVAMEJ4UV and onward.

  2. The presence of prohibited strings on the main download page suggests that users should refer to Node.js as "Node," which is incorrect. Users should use "Node.js" when referring to the project, and "node" when referring to the executable.

@Copilot Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings June 21, 2025 23:14
@avivkeller avivkeller requested a review from a team as a code owner June 21, 2025 23:14
Copy link

vercel bot commented Jun 21, 2025

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Updated (UTC)
nodejs-org ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview Jun 21, 2025 11:14pm

Copy link
Contributor

@Copilot Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull Request Overview

This PR fixes naming issues by removing prohibited strings referencing "Node" and adds UTM parameters to the support URL.

  • Removes the inappropriate "on Node!" text from feature notices in locale files.
  • Adds UTM parameters to the security support button URL in the MDX page.

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

File Description
packages/i18n/locales/en.json Removed "on Node!" from ltsVersionFeaturesNotice to ensure correct naming conventions.
apps/site/pages/en/index.mdx Updated the support URL with UTM parameters for tracking purposes.
Comments suppressed due to low confidence (2)

packages/i18n/locales/en.json:171

  • Confirm that removing 'on Node!' here satisfies our naming and brand guidelines and maintains clarity in messaging.
      "unsupportedVersionWarning": "This version is out of maintenance. Please use a currently supported version. <link>Understand EOL support.</link>",

apps/site/pages/en/index.mdx:24

  • [nitpick] Verify that the 'NodeJS+' UTM parameter meets our naming conventions and that the encoding is as intended for tracking purposes.
      <Button kind="secondary" className="!block" href="https://www.herodevs.com/support/node-nes?utm_source=NodeJS+&utm_medium=Link&utm_campaign=Homepage_button">

@avivkeller avivkeller added the github_actions:pull-request Trigger Pull Request Checks label Jun 21, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the github_actions:pull-request Trigger Pull Request Checks label Jun 21, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Jun 21, 2025

Lighthouse Results

URL Performance Accessibility Best Practices SEO Report
/en 🟢 99 🟢 100 🟢 100 🟢 91 🔗
/en/about 🟢 100 🟢 96 🟢 100 🟠 82 🔗
/en/about/previous-releases 🟢 99 🟢 96 🟢 100 🟠 83 🔗
/en/download 🟢 99 🟢 100 🟢 100 🟢 91 🔗
/en/blog 🟢 100 🟢 100 🟢 96 🟢 92 🔗

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 21, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 75.45%. Comparing base (8d29e0f) to head (f9abf3b).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #7881      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   75.47%   75.45%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         101      101              
  Lines        8311     8311              
  Branches      218      218              
==========================================
- Hits         6273     6271       -2     
- Misses       2036     2038       +2     
  Partials        2        2              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Member

@ovflowd ovflowd left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We shouldn't set any utm tags prior approval.

@avivkeller
Copy link
Member Author

We've been asked to add UTM tags in the original issue, which received no objections. Why wouldn't we add them to a new link we are adding to increase traffic to the source?

@MattIPv4
Copy link
Member

@ovflowd in the meeting we were explicitly asked to include UTMs so that the traffic can be attributed to Node.js/the foundation... I understand that we haven't been told exactly what those params should be, but I think given that we've decided to land this without hearing back, we can make a very educated guess based on the params used in the ESP blog.

@MattIPv4
Copy link
Member

If you are strictly against adding UTMs, then I will ask that we revert adding the ESP to the homepage until we hear back, so that we're not sabotaging our (and the foundation's) participation in the ESP.

Copy link
Member

@ovflowd ovflowd left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Feel free to fast-track this PR. I honestly don't have the emotional energy to argue or not on this matter. Do what y'all believe should be the right course of action.

@ovflowd
Copy link
Member

ovflowd commented Jun 21, 2025

cc @nodejs/nodejs-website feels like this possibly should be fast-tracled?

@MattIPv4
Copy link
Member

I think this can merge immediately without fast-track, as a urgent bugfix/errata? But if not, yeh, let's fast-track please.

@avivkeller avivkeller added this pull request to the merge queue Jun 22, 2025
@avivkeller
Copy link
Member Author

Merging now as an errata fix

Merged via the queue into main with commit 2fc6472 Jun 22, 2025
15 checks passed
@avivkeller avivkeller deleted the fixup/esp-pr branch June 22, 2025 01:34
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants