I think trimming older release doc content to keep the site managable is reasonable, and there are various approaches that could be used to trim things. Over at Qpid we tend to trim down to the last 2 years or so of release docs every now and then (its overdue currently, carrying just over 3). If taking an approach like that, as example there would clearly be old Artemis docs that could be removed. Another approach might be, removing even more docs for version streams not considered the current for some time, e.g maybe now all the 1.x Artemis docs could go except the latest 1.5.6 release.
Looking at the size and content of the release docs themselves is perhaps also important. Having a peek at whats there currently for the refreshed ActiveMQ site, I see the 5.x javadocs are using about 400MB per release, but over half of it looks to be for source html. If so, I think thats of limited value personally, with IDEs often pulling source(+javadoc) jars directly and browsers having various web UI options such as GitHub etc to utilise. Thats >200MB per release I think we could perhaps remove and substitute with a link to the release tag. Robbie On Wed, 8 May 2019 at 22:25, Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> wrote: > > Do we still need to provide documentation for older releases? > A big portion of the size now on the website is due to older releases. > > > I believe we should stop doing that, after all if you go to the > archive on previous releases, the binary will include documentations.
