Replace README.txt links that have a redirect with the preferred URL (including removing stale references to Drupal 8 docs)

Thanks for this issue ... I think we must wait for the issue at https://www.drupal.org/project/drupal/issues/3143115 to be fixed and committed before rolling any patch to this issue as this will otherwise conflict with the issue mentioned before.

Also I recommend broadening the scope to update all obsolete links in README file, as there are several links that may be updated to point to latest resource/page.

Thanks DevJoJodae for the scope expansion.
Actally its my bad to have this postponed, seems I had over thought about the conflict thing which is not true with this issue.

Adding patch for review.

I wonder if it's worth adding a test that checks that all URLs in these files are valid and land on a page (rather than a redirect).

Assigning to myself

Steps taken to check:

1. Applied the patch.-- patch applied cleanly
2. checked for any other links which might have been left in the patch
Found that the URL to best practices (https://www.drupal.org/best-practices) redirects to https://www.drupal.org/docs/7/site-building-best-practices/best-practices

The url should be cleaned, other than that patch looks fine.

changing status to RTBC

+++ b/README.txt
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ More about configuration:
-   https://www.drupal.org/project/modules
+   https://www.drupal.org/project/project_module

@@ -70,11 +70,11 @@ the required extensions separately; place the downloaded profile in the
-   https://www.drupal.org/project/distributions
+   https://www.drupal.org/project/project_distribution

@@ -87,9 +87,9 @@ custom theme.
-   https://www.drupal.org/project/themes
+   https://www.drupal.org/project/project_theme

@@ -111,15 +111,15 @@ when nothing existing comes close to what you need.
-   https://www.drupal.org/project/modules
+   https://www.drupal.org/project/project_module
...
-   https://www.drupal.org/developing/best-practices
+   https://www.drupal.org/docs/develop/standards

@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ MORE INFORMATION
-   "Security team" page at https://www.drupal.org/security-team
+   "Security team" page at https://www.drupal.org/drupal-security-team

+++ b/core/assets/scaffold/files/drupal.README.txt
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ More about configuration:
-   https://www.drupal.org/project/modules
+   https://www.drupal.org/project/project_module

@@ -70,11 +70,11 @@ the required extensions separately; place the downloaded profile in the
-   https://www.drupal.org/project/distributions
+   https://www.drupal.org/project/project_distribution

@@ -87,9 +87,9 @@ custom theme.
-   https://www.drupal.org/project/themes
+   https://www.drupal.org/project/project_theme

@@ -111,15 +111,15 @@ when nothing existing comes close to what you need.
-   https://www.drupal.org/project/modules
+   https://www.drupal.org/project/project_module
...
-   https://www.drupal.org/developing/best-practices
+   https://www.drupal.org/docs/develop/standards

@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ MORE INFORMATION
-   "Security team" page at https://www.drupal.org/security-team
+   "Security team" page at https://www.drupal.org/drupal-security-team

These don't seem to have anything to do with the scope in the issue title. Are we just relabeling them to avoid redirects?

I see in #4 that that's the idea. Retitling accordingly.

With the expanded scope, I reviewed this to check that all the links on the removed lines in the patch redirect to the links on the corresponding added lines. I similarly checked the few URLs not changed by this patch and verified that they don't redirect to anything else, with the exception of the best-practices link that @nitvirus mentioned. (It's in the D7 handbook, but the best practices are relevant for Drupal 8+ as well and are a good high-level introduction, so I think it's OK to retain this link in its aliased, non-D7 version.)

+++ b/README.txt
@@ -111,15 +111,15 @@ when nothing existing comes close to what you need.
-   https://api.drupal.org/api/drupal/8
+   https://api.drupal.org/api/drupal/9

This is the only link in the patch that is not simply a redirect and not. Weirdly, the /8 suffix takes me to 8.2.x docs?! I pinged @drumm about that.

Committed to 9.1.x and 9.0.x. I didn't backport it to 8.9.x because of the API docs link. I did debate backporting it anyway because the 9.0.x API is closer to Drupal 8.9.x than 8.2.x's is. 😂.

Setting "Patch (to be ported)" for an 8.9.x version. We could do one of:

1. Just removing the change to that line from the patch, in the hope and expectation that infra will fix it so api.d.o/api/drupal/8 redirects to something less stupid.
2. Linking the 8.9.x docs directly: https://api.drupal.org/api/drupal/8.9.x (It's not like we're going to have to fix that in the next D8 minor, because there isn't a "next D8 minor".
3. Removing the /8 from the end which seems to be 8.8.x docs currently (but it may not always be, so I think 1 or 2 are better choices).

Thanks!

I like the 2nd approach better, we know we have put in a hardcoded url but there is no dependency on infra.

8.9.x receives only security updates, so there is nothing to do here.

@larowlan:

Yes please set it to fixed and change the version to the lowest version it went into