Re: Documentation: Should we possibly have aliases for current stable and current devel?

[Kevin Cole]

In the past, when I've asked a question, the answer has often been a
gentle RTFM with a link to the appropriate info, followed by "Oh.
You're using the version from four days ago, rather than the version
du jour. That documentation doesn't apply to your version." (Yes, I
know, a bit of an exaggeration.)

If the later is truly the case, then it seems the same argument should
apply to documentation and having documentation for versions 2.13,
2.14, 2.15, 2.16, 2.17, 2.18, 2.19, 2.20, 2.21, 2.22, 2.23, 2.24, and
2.25 on the site seems a tad ridiculous when questions to the list
often elicit a response akin to "You're not using a new enough version
of the software".

Perhaps a bit of pruning / archiving elsewhere / referring people to
git commits / wiki diff's for older versions of the documentation is
in order... Anything from keeping search engines from cataloging way
too much and then confusing various versions into a single mess.

On the other hand, I strongly favor sticking with a distribution's
package rather than starting every day with a "git pull". So, I'm
always slightly behind the latest and greatest. Still, having 13
versions on the same site seems  a bit of overkill.