Deoren Moor

> @rgherhards: (maintainer hat on): I do not violently object opening up v5-stable for edits, but I would caution against putting too much effort into it. We are short on...

> any currently supported linux distro is using (or at least offering as an > option) something much newer than v5. Considering how many years it's been since > the...

> @davidelang: ahh, I disagree with removing all reference to the obsolete legacy parameters, > someone looking to figure out what a config they inherited does should not be >...

> @davidelang: If we are still leaving enough bread crumbs in the current docs so that someone > faced with a legacy config that includes obsolete things in it can...

> On Tue, 16 Jan 2018, Deoren Moor wrote: > > > - Update module docs to include a short list (list only, not details) of [`obsolete legacy`](http://www.rsyslog.com/doc/v8-stable/configuration/conf_formats.html) format directives...

@davidelang @rgerhards What do you think about listing the [`obsolete legacy`](http://www.rsyslog.com/doc/v8-stable/configuration/conf_formats.html) format equivalent in the tables used in this prototype format (example taken from the table in PR #476): http://rsyslog.whyaskwhy.org/imuxsock_parameter_syntax/configuration/modules/imuxsock-parameter-headers.html...

> > @davidelang @rgerhards What do you think about listing the [`obsolete legacy`](http://www.rsyslog.com/doc/v8-stable/configuration/conf_formats.html) format equivalent in the tables used in this prototype format (example taken from the table in PR...

@rgerhards After posting that screenshot I came to roughly the same conclusion. I ended up going with the same language used in the formats description page: "obsolete legacy directive" Live...

> @rgerhards: Nevertheless, I think the way this is done (in table right at the current format description) is a great way to do it. I am strongly in favor...

@davidelang @rgerhards Thanks for the feedback!