clojure-site VS clojure-toolbox.com

> At least in the official docs, things should be cleaned up and made much more user friendly.

The source of clojure.org is at https://github.com/clojure/clojure-site/ and it gets a pretty constant stream of updates these days (it even accepts PRs!). It's a huge improvement over what it used to be -- so it depends on what/when you're comparing it to.

If you have specific criticisms or suggestions, I expect they'd be welcomed.

I'll concede the docs could be improved but, hey, feel free to open an issue or PR here https://github.com/clojure/clojure-site instead of arguing with everyone on Reddit, eh?

Eventually, I'm sure there will be a 4th edition of Programming Clojure and it will cover those tools in greater detail, but if you find issues or questions, feel free to file them at https://github.com/clojure/clojure-site/issues or ask on https://ask.clojure.org .

succession - the following of one value after another, as opposed to "updating", in which one value displaces another. Discussion at https://github.com/clojure/clojure-site/issues/188

The ^ macro actually annotates metadata onto the value that read, rather than the resulting runtime value. This is mentioned in the last paragraph on the metadata page, and there's some more explanation in this Github issue.

These are good points and I'd welcome feedback at https://github.com/clojure/clojure-site/issues

> The getting started page remains as bad as I remember it with links to discontinued Github projects.

I assume you mean https://clojure.org/guides/getting_started. That page has just a handful of links and none of them lead to unmaintained/discontinued projects.

If you mean something else, please be more concrete. "The page has bad stuff" is not actionable, and it's hard to distinguish unmaintained/discontinued/"dead" from complete, even when there are still open issues and users complaining.

Same comment about https://www.clojure-toolbox.com. Keeping track of everything is a _lot_ of work that's IMO unreasonable to expect the author of the toolbox to be doing all the time. As the web page mentions in its footer, "Library suggestions can be submitted [at] the project page" - https://github.com/weavejester/clojure-toolbox.com. And people are doing that, and their suggestions are being taken into account.

> For example the getting started for Pedestal, one of the main web libraries has its Getting Started page last updated seven years ago? http://pedestal.io/guides/hello-world

And?.. Pedestal is stable, its main feature set hasn't changed in years and probably won't change - why would the guide need to be updated?