Hi David, On Sun, Sep 19, 2021 at 1:46 AM David Jencks <david.a.jen...@gmail.com> wrote: > Now I have more questions :-\
:) > IIUC the latest (code) release is 3.11.2. Is this what is documented in the > 3.11.x doc version? Yes > Does the doc ‘latest’ version document unreleased code, i.e. the current > state of the ‘main’ branch? If so, would it be appropriate to make it a > pre-release version? Yes it's whatever is on `main`, we could name it pre-release instead of latest. I would forgo the `latest` as a version, i.e. go with Antora versionless documentation, and put "(Pre release)" in the name, as we have for LTS. > Is 3.12 (non-LTS, IIUC) going to get a doc version other than ‘latest’? It should, we did that before for latest (and non `main`) non-LTS versions. > Apparently 3.4.x (LTS) went out of support sometime around last July. Would > it be appropriate to remove the doc version or label it out of support, > perhaps (LTS expired)? I think we should, it was probably left there because of inertia. Not sure how folk feel about keeping older versions of documentation, e.g. we do keep a release archive. Perhaps it would be good for the users to also release a documentation archive? > In general, it might be nice to include the expiration date of LTS versions > somewhere prominent in the docs, perhaps the components index page. +1 > too many questions…. Keep 'em coming :) zoran -- Zoran Regvart
