Hello, and thanks for your contribution!

I'm a bot set up to make sure that the project can legally accept your contribution by verifying you have signed the PSF contributor agreement (CLA).

Unfortunately we couldn't find an account corresponding to your GitHub username on bugs.python.org (b.p.o) to verify you have signed the CLA (this might be simply due to a missing "GitHub Name" entry in your b.p.o account settings). This is necessary for legal reasons before we can look at your contribution. Please follow the steps outlined in the CPython devguide to rectify this issue.

Thanks again to your contribution and we look forward to looking at it!

Have just signed and submitted the CLA.

@jamesfe You have not associated your bugs.python.org account with your GitHub account. Please see the CLA comment from earlier about how to rectify the situation.

@brettcannon how embarrassing that even as I submit a change to the docs, I myself failed to read that comment completely. I have added the relevant info to my BPO account. Thanks!

@jamesfe 😄 it happens. It's all good now.

Do note, though, that your PR didn't pass our CI check of the docs, so that will need to be fixed before anyone probably looks at your suggested changes.

@brettcannon editing previous comment: Everything is fixed. Those slightly frustrating documentation checks are actually pretty smart and caught some links I'd missed in my original pass.

@marco-buttu Great suggestion - I'll probably do this tomorrow morning (paris time). Thanks for the info regarding make linkcheck!

Here are some more fixed up link sections - one area I am a little nervous about modifying is the change release documents.

These seem quasi-historical in nature and refer to things like old Python module listing pages which are no longer in existence as well as Zope Corporation (see license.rst) which may now be Zope Community - are these files off limits?

If not my best course of action is probably to just delete the link references and leave the text in place since some things haven't migrated, they are simply gone

@jamesfe both Doc/license.rst and LICENSE should be changed according to @gvanrossum wording in bpo-25910. Just wait a bit because I want to be sure #1933 aims to fix only redirections and not also broken links. I will review your changes as soon as I get an answer. Thanks :-)

Great no problem - I am not waiting by the phone for this PR, it is unlikely it is blocking anything ;-)

@jamesfe the @CuriousLearner comment in #2765 makes me think that this PR is a duplicate.

@marco-buttu yes - there are some links I fix here that are not fixed in #1933. @CuriousLearner can cherry-pick this commit onto their branch for an easy way to integrate my changes, but I am not particular one way or the other.

Hey @jamesfe I would be happy to cherry-pick your commits into the patch. But I haven't got a review till now.

Is anyone available to add the skip news label to this?

Thanks @jamesfe for the PR, and @asvetlov for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 2.7, 3.6.
🐍🍒⛏🤖

GH-4835 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.6 branch.

Thanks!

GH-4836 is a backport of this pull request to the 2.7 branch.

Thanks so much for merging this!

You are welcome!