Can the not found page be changed to use Discourse’s built-in search rather than Google? Some sites may not be indexed by Google or not be indexed frequently enough for it be very effective.
7 Likes
I actually think this was put in place because the full-page search results were not yet completed. But now that they are, I agree it’s probably better to change this to an input for the full-page search.
2 Likes
No, this was put in place because Google’s search is generally superior to ours. Wee bit of difference in operating budget.
Note that this search form is disabled if the site is private, e.g. not index-able from the outside world without a login, ala Facebook.
1 Like
Clearly we should change this for sites that require login or ones that are not indexed (disable robots.txt)
My site is public and may never be indexed by Google. Is the best option to hide the search with CSS and provide no search on that page at all?
If “allow index in robots txt” is set to false I will change it so it uses full page search. That is a no brainer.
5 Likes
If not replacing the search with Discourse search, it would be good to be able to optionally replace it with other search providers.
(disclaimer: I work for one)
2 Likes
Was this ever implemented or has it regressed? My forum is private, thus not indexed by search engines, and allow index in robots txt is set to false. However, users still see the Google search. It would be good to replace that with the regular Discourse search.
…
3 Likes
Possibly, @neil can you have a look when you are back Monday?
5 Likes
That was never implemented. So we could schedule that for 2.1.
Also, there was a regression. We had code to hide the Google search form for private sites, but it wasn’t working. I fixed that.
4 Likes
I do think our internal search is good enough to use there now (hat 
tip @sam) so can you make sure that’s on your list for 2.1?
6 Likes
Yeah I would like this done now, linking to Google is a problem in quite a few cases, @misaka4e21 can you take this?
4 Likes
7 Likes