Without any upgrade path, the old versions are not useful. +1 on redirecting doc to stable release(s).
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Kostas Kloudas <k.klou...@data-artisans.com > wrote: > Hi Ufuk, > > +1 > > I think that this is a nice change! > Thanks Ufuk for opening the discussion. > > I think that broken/redirect links are not an issue, > as either way the information provided is far outdated > (== wrong). > > As for the warning, we cannot put it in the header instead > of the footer? Sth like, this page may contain outdated info, > please refer to XXX for an updated version. > > Kostas > > > On Aug 16, 2017, at 6:02 PM, Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > Hey devs, > > > > I would like to stop serving the documentation for all Flink versions > > prior to 1.0. > > > > Do you have any concerns about this? > > > > These Flink versions are very old without any upgrade path to newer > > versions but they still get a lot of traffic and most new users don't > > realize that they are looking at a very outdated docs page. > > > > Even with a stronger warning about being outdated, I don't see a point > > in serving them. > > > > If we choose to do this, I would redirect these ancient pages to the > > docs of the latest stable release and update the release process Wiki > > page to update those redirects etc. > > > > This will mean that some links in old StackOverflow questions and the > > mailing list archives will be broken/redirected. If you have concerns > > about this, please raise your voice in this thread. > > > > – Ufuk > > > > PS: I've created an issue to improve the visibility of the outdated > > warning here https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-7462. I will > > only apply this to versions >= 1.0 for now. > >
