Skip to content

docs: add Package and Container Image Retention Policy - #2764

Open
probelabs[bot] wants to merge 12 commits into
mainfrom
add-retention-policy
Open

docs: add Package and Container Image Retention Policy#2764
probelabs[bot] wants to merge 12 commits into
mainfrom
add-retention-policy

Merge main into add-retention-policy

33e376e
Select commit
Loading
Failed to load commit list.
probelabs / Visor: technical-accuracy failed Aug 27, 2026 in 32s

🚨 Check Failed

technical-accuracy check failed because fail_if condition was met.

Details

📊 Summary

  • Total Issues: 3
  • Error Issues: 2
  • Warning Issues: 1

🔍 Failure Condition Results

Failed Conditions

  • global_fail_if: output.issues && output.issues.some(i => i.severity === 'critical' || i.severity === 'error')
    • Severity: ❌ error

Issues by Category

Documentation (2)

  • developer-support/retention-policy.mdx:23 - The documentation presents a contradiction regarding the Community Edition (CE) retention policy. Lines 23-25 state that CE packages remain available for as long as the Enterprise Edition (EE) window allows because they share public repositories. However, the note on lines 60-61 states that a CE package is 'independently removed under its own window'. These two statements are conflicting and will cause confusion for users.
  • ⚠️ developer-support/retention-policy.mdx:80 - The tense used in the 'First-time notice' section is ambiguous. It states "we've given all affected customers 90 days notice", which is past tense. However, the policy pruning does not start until December 2026. This should be in the future tense to avoid confusion.

Logic (1)

  • system:0 - Global failure condition met: output.issues && output.issues.some(i => i.severity === 'critical' || i.severity === 'error')

Powered by Visor from Probelabs

💡 TIP: You can chat with Visor using /visor ask <your question>

Annotations

Check failure on line 61 in developer-support/retention-policy.mdx

See this annotation in the file changed.

@probelabs probelabs / Visor: technical-accuracy

documentation Issue

The documentation presents a contradiction regarding the Community Edition (CE) retention policy. Lines 23-25 state that CE packages remain available for as long as the Enterprise Edition (EE) window allows because they share public repositories. However, the note on lines 60-61 states that a CE package is 'independently removed under its own window'. These two statements are conflicting and will cause confusion for users.
Raw output
Clarify the effective retention policy for CE. If CE packages are indeed retained as long as EE packages, rewrite the note on lines 60-61 to reflect this. For example: 'While the official retention window for CE is 'current minus 2 minors', packages may remain available longer in practice due to sharing a repository with EE packages. However, users should not rely on availability beyond the official CE window.' If CE packages are pruned independently, remove the statement on lines 23-25.

Check warning on line 81 in developer-support/retention-policy.mdx

See this annotation in the file changed.

@probelabs probelabs / Visor: technical-accuracy

documentation Issue

The tense used in the 'First-time notice' section is ambiguous. It states "we've given all affected customers 90 days notice", which is past tense. However, the policy pruning does not start until December 2026. This should be in the future tense to avoid confusion.
Raw output
Change the phrasing from "we've given" to "we will give" or "we will provide" to reflect that this is a future action.