Add Acquia.com - Drupal Blog to Planet Drupal

The feed passes validation.

Hi apaderno, do you need anything else from us to get this approved and added to Planet Drupal? Thanks!

Hi @mwetmore

Unfortunately the feed currently does not meet all requirements to be added to Planet Drupal. -> https://www.drupal.org/drupalorg/docs/content/planet-drupal#s-how-youget... →

There is currently only one article which would qualify for Planet Drupal. The other one is too old.

Other things which are OK:
- Feed validation tested by @apaderno
- Content is trimmed
- Images are not relative URL's
- Content itself is ok

Maybe an exception can be made it being Acquia @apaderno 😉

Totally fair @BramDriesen! I will connect with our content team on Tuesday and make sure some of the articles are more recent. I didn't see a requirement in https://www.drupal.org/drupalorg/docs/content/planet-drupal#s-how-youget... → that was based on how old the content is, but totally understand. We have a lot more to publish we didn't want to spam that feed on our first submission.

You only need 2 recent ones 😉 so I guess if you already have some posts queued it's not a lot of work.

Hi @BramDriesen, nope not a ton of work at all! We've added a new Drupal for eCommerce article into the feed, hopefully this is good to go now.

I checked the feed again and we indeed have 3 articles now. So it's ready to go!

I added the feed to Planet Drupal ( https://www.drupal.org/aggregator/sources/2045 → ).

Automatically closed - issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.

Hi, I am a Planet Drupal reader and have noticed that many posts on https://www.drupal.org/planet → don't include an image, because relative image paths are used in the feed, and not absolute paths.

I have not checked your web site, but just want to highlight this recommendation from https://www.drupal.org/drupalorg/docs/content/planet-drupal → to make sure we get more images on Planet Drupal:

It is strongly recommended that you avoid relative URLs to images in your posts. They won't display for people reading your post on drupal.org and is generally discouraged.

Have a nice day!

I am changing status, since what reported in the previous comment should be addressed.

Thanks @apaderno. I went through 30 issues, and then stopped, because I didn't want to clog the system with comments. But I might carry on, since it seems like you think it's a good idea, to follow up on the image path status.

Should we consider tightening the requirements, and make it "practically required" to use absolute image paths, not just "strongly recommended" on https://www.drupal.org/drupalorg/docs/content/planet-drupal → ? Also, we could even require an image, to spice things up?

Today, Planet Drupal is literally a wall of text of 20 blog posts with zero images.

I take that the reason why that is not a stronger requirement is that it is difficult to know how an article appears on Planet Drupal before adding the feed to Planet Drupal.
For example, an article added to Planet Drupal could be truncated before the images. In this case, the images can also use relative URLs, but that does not influence how the article is shown on Planet Drupal.

Actually, on Planet Drupal ( https://www.drupal.org/aggregator/sources/2045 → ), articles are truncated before the images. The images are not shown because relative URLs, but because the articles on Planet Drupal do not contain them.

Thanks for clearing that up @apaderno.

It would be awesome if the text in the description field could get expanded, so that images were included. We need more images on Drupal Planet.

And about images and truncation -- the solution could simply be to move up the image closer to the top, so that it got included in the description, or create a customized format for the description field in the XML feed, as far as I see it.

Keep in mind that what shown on Planet Drupal should be a summary of the article available on their sites. Each article should not "monopolize" the pages shown on https://www.drupal.org/planet → and images would take away much of the available space.