docs: fix broken links

[markstur]

Summary

• many links were broken due to stable and development roots

• addition links broken due to rearranging

• examples links just don't exist

• Use relative links to help maintain stable and development

• Misc fixes to links and typos

• Remove the links to missing examples for now

Linked Issues

Fixes #1856
Fixes #1884

Documentation

• No Docs Needed:

This is doc fixing.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @markstur, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request significantly improves the integrity and user experience of the documentation by resolving a widespread issue of broken links. The changes primarily involve updating link structures to use relative paths, making the documentation more robust to changes in its deployment environment or internal organization. Additionally, links to non-existent examples have been removed, and minor textual errors have been corrected, ensuring a more accurate and navigable resource for users.

Highlights

• Link Fixes: Converted numerous absolute documentation links to relative paths to ensure they function correctly across different environments (stable and development roots) and after documentation rearrangements.
• Missing Examples Removal: Removed links to examples that were identified as missing, preventing users from encountering broken references.
• Typo Corrections: Addressed minor typos within the documentation, such as 'Fileformats' to 'File formats' and 'supoported' to 'supported'.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request provides a comprehensive fix for broken links and typos throughout the documentation. By converting absolute links to relative paths for both stable and development versions, the changes significantly improve the documentation's maintainability. The PR also corrects several typos and removes links to pages that are no longer available, as noted in the summary. The fixes are consistent and well-executed across all modified files. This is an excellent contribution that enhances the quality and accuracy of the documentation. I found no issues with the proposed changes.

[markstur]

I'm afraid relative links were probably avoided for some good reasons, but it looks to me like the best way to maintain development and stable right now. If we have some known issues with that, we can work on some automation. It would be nice to fix the broken docs first.

[markstur]

@tomkis the relative links are great for local doc serving and dev. Fixing so many 404s and the copy from dev to stable doesn't need swizzling. Any feedback on this approach?