Just to be sure I am not missing an additional change since both PR and issue have been approved, so no more changes should be done.

In general, I think that the front documentation page should always point to the latest master. All specific release information should be available in the corresponding page.

Just to be sure I am not missing an additional change since both PR and issue have been approved, so no more changes should be done.

It is my understanding from the above discussion that https://github.com/lsst/pipelines_lsst_io/blame/17.0.x/index.rst#L68 and https://github.com/lsst/pipelines_lsst_io/blame/17.0.x/index.rst#L99 (these are the “two instances” that Jonathan refers to) both need to be changed before this ticket is complete.

In general, I think that the front documentation page should always point to the latest master. All specific release information should be available in the corresponding page.

I think that's a change to how we've done things in the past. I have no particular personal preference as to whether it's a good idea.

Thank you John. I would like to keep doing, for the moment at least, what has been done for the previous releases unless it is clearly a problem.

However, if in the past we should have updated index.rst at lines 68 and 99 with the official release, I would expect that now those lines should be pointing to the 16.0 documentation packages. But they are pointing to master.

One of those lines did not exist in the v16 release, so it cannot possibly have pointed anywhere.

The fact the other one pointed to master was a mistake. Please do not repeat the same mistake.

Gabriele Comoretto [X]: the ticket is already "reviewed" and the work is merged, so I don't think there's anything to prevent this from being "Done". From a documentation engineering perspective my short-term focus is on deprecating any need for doxygen.lsst.codes at all, so I'm not particularly concerned about any loose ends here.