OpenHub link on Lazarus forum page points to stale repositories

[Bogen85]

It shows last commits as 3 years ago.

While is the linked to from the main forum page, it does not provide an accurate description of the current state of the project.

Same for the the other Free Pascal project entries in OpenHub.

[Thaddy]

Openhub?????? Not an official source....
Please stick to well documented official sources and not, please not, use secondary resources, however at some point well meant.

[Bogen85]

Openhub?????? Not an official source....

Then why does the Lazarus front page point to it?

Black Duck is commonly used in large companies where I've worked, to check for known vulnerabilities in open source software.

Open Hub is theirs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synopsys

[Bogen85]

So whether you can consider them an official source or not, a link to them is on the Lazarus front page...

https://www.synopsys.com/software-integrity/security-testing/software-composition-analysis/integrations.html

[Bogen85]

Whether or not people consider openhub to be a reliable good place to list one's project, I obviously was not the one to link to it on the every Lazarus page.

I was simply pointing out the project information the page linked to is not up to date (is 3 years old). So in my opinion should either be removed or updated.

But that is not up to me...

[Bogen85]

This link specifically, on every Lazarus page: https://www.openhub.net/p/lazarus?ref=sample

[Bogen85]

This, at the bottom of every forum page.

[Thaddy]

I phrased it very politely -re-read it - on purpose and I stick to my opinion. That is a plain mistake.
Nothing malice going on, but still that should not happen.
The wiki is bad enough, we do not need more sources of misconceptions.

[ccrause]

It shows last commits as 3 years ago.

The last commit information was collected from Graham's unofficial Github repository, which has disappeared since the move to Gitlab.  The code location information should be updated to remove the old SVN and Github links and add the Gitlab link.

Edit: I updated the code location to point to Gitlab.

[MarkMLl]

I phrased it very politely -re-read it - on purpose and I stick to my opinion. That is a plain mistake.
Nothing malice going on, but still that should not happen.
The wiki is bad enough, we do not need more sources of misconceptions.

While I agree with the sentiment, the real problem is that users fail to appreciate that a wiki, plus unofficial site mirrors etc., are not definitive and are not maintained on any formal basis (e.g. rebuilt when a new version of FPC or Lazarus is released).

FPC itself, when run with -h, does provide a documentation link to the user.

To my surprise the Lazarus IDE, under Help -> About, does. However it totally spoils things by having a moderately prominent "Documentation:" label... which points to the wiki.

MarkMLl

[Thaddy]

Yes, Mark,
If it wasn't so sad, I'd be ROFL.

[MarkMLl]

Reported for Lazarus as issue 40069.

I'm not bothering doing so for FPC, since I expect that I'd be told that having a link in the banner was contrary to the spirit of the language.

MarkMLl