On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 08:07:47PM -0500, Isaac Morland wrote: > On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 19:33, David G. Johnston <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 5:26 PM Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > I think the ideal solution is to create a section for all the rename > cases and do all the redirects to that page. The page would list the > old and new name for each item, and would link to the section for each > new item. > > > > Nothing prevents us from doing that for simple renames. For me, this > situation is not a simple rename and the proposed solution is appropriate > for what it is - changing the implementation details of an existing > feature. We can do both - though the simple rename page doesn't seem > particularly appealing at first glance. > > > I for one do not like following a bookmark or link and then being redirected > to > a generic page that doesn't relate to the specific link I was following. What > is being proposed here is not as bad as the usual, where all the old links > simply turn into redirects to the homepage, but it's still disorienting. I > would much rather each removed page be moved to an appendix (without renaming) > and edited to briefly explain what happened to the page and provide links to > the appropriate up-to-date page or pages.
Yes, that is pretty much the same thing I was suggesting, except that each rename has its own _original_ URL link, which I think is also acceptable. My desire is for these items to all exist in one place, and an appendix of them seems fine. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee