njames93 added a comment. In D126495#3571403 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D126495#3571403>, @LegalizeAdulthood wrote:
> In D126495#3570767 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D126495#3570767>, @aaron.ballman > wrote: > >> In D126495#3569863 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D126495#3569863>, >> @LegalizeAdulthood wrote: >> >>> In D126495#3569029 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D126495#3569029>, @njames93 >>> wrote: >>> >>>> It would also be nice if there was a redirect that would dynamically >>>> translate the old links to new links. >>> >>> You can do that with `.htaccess`, but I don't know if that's considered >>> acceptable in clang documentation. >> >> FWIW, I don't have any idea if this is or isn't acceptable. > > Mucking around with an `.htaccess` file is very web server dependent. Surely > this can't be the first time that a page of documentation changed names or > locations? I'm betting that they didn't worry about putting in redirects and > let search engines handle guiding users to the correct page. Search engines isn't really an issue, its more people who are using older versions of llvm that try and go to the documentation which turns out is a dead link. Having said that, I still think the lack of a redirect shouldn't block this change. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D126495/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D126495 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
