On 6/16/2026 2:43 PM, Rich Bowen wrote:
On Jun 16, 2026, at 2:35 PM, Philippe Cloutier <[email protected]> wrote: I may misunderstand what you are proposing, but I am skeptical about your proposal. To make an analogy with Wikipedia, it has countless outdated pages, and countless current pages, but pages in the first group have nothing logical in common, besides getting insufficient love. The English Wikipedia only (tries to) group outdated pages in a category to track pages which need work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Articles_with_obsolete_informationI fail to see how httpd webpages could be split. What I agree would be a good idea would be to add warnings on outdated content. Wikipedia templates allow doing it at the article section level, as in the following case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Civil_Aviation_Organization#Environment Template:Update also allows specifying a date, quantifying how bad the problem is.[…]Or are you saying there is content which you consider "historical", in the sense that it *should not* be updated? Perhaps examples of what you suggest qualifying as historical would clarify.We’re discussing one. The list of contributors to the project is not *outdated*. It’s a historical record. It is still true and relevant, in that it gives credit to those who came before us.
It is still (largely) true and relevant, but that does not prevent it from being badly outdated.
Are you saying that you would qualify the Apache Contributors page as “historical”? And if so, would you qualify https://maven.apache.org/team.html the same way?
-- 🅭🄍: https://www.philippecloutier.com/Common+infrastructure+licensing#list Philippe Cloutier
OpenPGP_0x8A37FF445EA6611D.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
