-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
docs: remove broken links #2282
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, the changes are definitely an improvement on their own 👍
### Where are the tutorials? | ||
|
||
See [Examples and tutorials](Examples-and-tutorials.md). | ||
|
||
### What features are planned ? | ||
### What features are planned? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we split this section in two parts - what has been done and what is being planned? We can also point readers to "LB3 Feature Parity" issue.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually, I was thinking whether it's better to remove this list completely because features in plan are dynamic and changes over time. Maybe it's better to put something like:
Our roadmap is captured in <link to github search with "roadmap" label>.
You can also check out our monthly milestone plans: https://github.com/strongloop/loopback-next/labels/Monthly%20Milestone.
For LoopBack 3 users, here is the list of LB3 Feature parity we plan to implement in the future: https://github.com/strongloop/loopback-next/issues/1920.
What do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Your proposal looks good 👍
We should actually run an automated tool to find all the broken links and fix/remove them. |
It would be even better to run such tool as part of our CI builds, similarly to how we run commit-lint and code-lint. Such setup is out of scope of this pull request though. |
@hacksparrow, thanks for the suggestion. Do you have some tools in mind that we can add to CI builds? Either way, could you please open a new issue? Thanks. |
When looking up some information, I found out some broken links and irrelevant information.
In this PR, I'm proposing to remove links that no longer exist or relevant.