Re: Documentation: 21.5. Default Roles

Greetings,

* Alvaro Herrera (alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com) wrote:
> On 2020-Feb-03, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
>
> > So, if there was something done to redirect people from specific
> > deprecated documentation pages historically, it was before my time. Most
> > of the redirects have been as general purposes ones (e.g. /docs/12), the
> > rules we put in for getting rid of "static", and the release notes,
> > which still receives some negative feedback towards it for different
> > reasons (though I think overall the effort was well-received). Anyway,
> > if we had a redirect in place, I'd want us to do it well.
>
> I +1 changing the title and +1 having the redirect. That said, I think
> people landing in a page titled "predefined roles" when they're looking
> for a page titled "default roles" would be quite confused for a while
> and perhaps continue to search for the page they think they're looking
> for. (I know, it has happened to me.) I suggest we add a very short
> paragraph --maybe a <note>-- to the effect that feature-X used to be
> called feature-Y, immediately following the section title.

I'm a bit confused as it sounded like having the redirect wouldn't be
easy to do.. I also agree that keeping the URL the same as today but
changing that URL to be talking about 'predefined roles' would be quite
confusing.

Having some kind of landing page with the existing URL that had a link
for people to click on to get to the new URL seems like it would
possibly work. I'd be happier with having that done in master and
keeping the back-branches as-is, since I don't really like the idea that
we're retroactively renaming a feature in our existing releases.

That said, if we at least have the landing page then at least people
will be less likely to be confused.

Thanks,

Stephen