Re: svn commit: r1825010 - /httpd/site/trunk/content/docs/index.mdtext

[William A Rowe Jr <wr...@apache.org>]

Perhaps we want to restore 2.0 as well as 1.3 with an (obsolete) or
(historical) tag, and reverse the list for completeness?

Alternately, remove 1.3 and 2.0 altogether?

Each represents about 1% of total httpd deployments, and suggest those
deployments are rather abandoned anyways, so the value of docs pages is
largely for historic research, which is already available from svn history.


On Feb 21, 2018 15:47, <wr...@apache.org> wrote:

> Author: wrowe
> Date: Wed Feb 21 21:47:28 2018
> New Revision: 1825010
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1825010&view=rev
> Log:
> This appears to be significantly out of date, if we meant for a legacy 2.0
> ref, we would want a legacy 1.3 ref.
>
> Modified:
>     httpd/site/trunk/content/docs/index.mdtext
>
> Modified: httpd/site/trunk/content/docs/index.mdtext
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/site/trunk/content/docs/
> index.mdtext?rev=1825010&r1=1825009&r2=1825010&view=diff
> ============================================================
> ==================
> --- httpd/site/trunk/content/docs/index.mdtext (original)
> +++ httpd/site/trunk/content/docs/index.mdtext Wed Feb 21 21:47:28 2018
> @@ -24,11 +24,9 @@ our [distribution
>  mirrors](http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/httpd/docs/). Online
>  browsable documentation is also available:
>
> --  [Version 2.4](2.4/)
> +-  [Version 2.4](2.4/) ([Current](current/))
>
> --  [Version 2.2](2.2/)
> -
> --  [Version 2.0](2.0/) (Legacy)
> +-  [Version 2.2](2.2/) (End Of Life)
>
>  -  [Trunk](trunk/) (development version)
>
>
>
>