cc at least @YutaroHayakawa @squeed who I saw authored some of these warnings. I sometimes notice statements like this when they are proposed into the tree and I recognize that they create minor tech debt for a subsequent release. The owners for the specific docs are unlikely to revisit the docs to remove these old references. Not sure if it's better to avoid documenting this stuff if we know the information will be stale in a few months, or better to document and accept that sometimes the docs just get overgrown with stale info. 🤔

/test

cc at least @YutaroHayakawa @squeed who I saw authored some of these warnings. I sometimes notice statements like this when they are proposed into the tree and I recognize that they create minor tech debt for a subsequent release. The owners for the specific docs are unlikely to revisit the docs to remove these old references. Not sure if it's better to avoid documenting this stuff if we know the information will be stale in a few months, or better to document and accept that sometimes the docs just get overgrown with stale info. 🤔

Yeah, in this specific issue, I could expect that the issue will be solved in a few months, so could avoid documentation. The actual problem is already described well in the linked GH issue, so this document was solely introduced to letting users notice there's a known issue before they use the feature. Otherwise, we need to rely on users to check the GH issues to discover the known issue. I'm not sure how much of our users have a habit to check the GH issue before enabling the feature.

On the other hand, it is too easy for developers to forget about this kind of the doc (like I did). I don't really come up with a better way to avoid that mistake with relying on the author's memory.

Maybe this is one of those things we just state, as long as there's a version number and you include that version number in the to-be-stale content, at least we can grep for older version numbers a couple of times a year and clean them up. Maybe we don't need anything more elaborate than that. I found these somehow, right?