Skip to content
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

Header still links to the "old docs site" #1013

Open
lurch opened this issue Dec 16, 2021 · 2 comments
Open

Header still links to the "old docs site" #1013

lurch opened this issue Dec 16, 2021 · 2 comments

Comments

@lurch
Copy link
Contributor

lurch commented Dec 16, 2021

In the header at the top-right of https://asciidoctor.org/ there's a "Docs" link which takes you to https://asciidoctor.org/docs/
And when you navigate to that page it says:
"You’ve arrived at the landing page for the old Asciidoctor documentation. The landing page for the new documentation is located at https://docs.asciidoctor.org, now a dedicated site."

Should the "Docs" link in the header just take you directly to https://docs.asciidoctor.org ?

@mojavelinux
Copy link
Member

We're still in the process of depleting https://asciidoctor.org/docs and populating https://docs.asciidoctor.org. Once we're sufficiently done, we'll link directly there.

@pintergreg
Copy link

This is my main concern with the website, almost every time I need something from the docs I'm wandering on the site while I finally found the link to https://docs.asciidoctor.org/asciidoctor/latest/
Yeah, I know I should bookmark it, but realistically if someone clicks the button docs, they expects a working documentation, not some old junk.

The irony is that https://docs.asciidoctor.org/ is actually good, but extremely hard to find.

What is left to port, how can I help? Please, pin issue and set up a roadmap. This status quo sets back the whole project in my opinion.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants