## What changed?
In `docs/architecture/history-service.md`, links pointed at
`service/history/workflow_task_handler_callbacks.go`. That file no
longer exists on `main` — its handlers were extracted into
`service/history/api/respondworkflowtaskcompleted/` (PRs #5902, #5904,
#5905, #5908, #5931, May 2024).
Repointed the dead links to the current code in
`service/history/api/respondworkflowtaskcompleted/api.go`, pinned to
commit `28dd23a` (current `main`), consistent with the doc's
pinned-commit convention:
**Line 171 — "Code entrypoints":**
| Anchor text | Old (`workflow_task_handler_callbacks.go`) | New
(`respondworkflowtaskcompleted/api.go`) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| handler | `handleWorkflowTaskCompleted` L371 | `Invoke` L110 |
| accumulates updates | `handleCommands` call L562 | `handleCommands`
call L416 |
| calls | `UpdateWorkflowExecutionWithNewAsActive` L690 |
`UpdateWorkflowExecutionWithNewAsActive` L623 |
**Line 310 — "Call sites":**
| Anchor text | Old | New |
| --- | --- | --- |
| `handleWorkflowTaskCompleted` → `Invoke` |
`workflow_task_handler_callbacks.go` L690 |
`respondworkflowtaskcompleted/api.go` L623 |
## Why?
The old blob links were stale link-rot pointing at code that has since
moved, so readers following them landed on a deleted file path on
`main`.
## How did you test it?
- [x] verified each new anchor resolves to the intended symbol at the
pinned commit (`git show origin/main:.../api.go` lines 110/416/623)
- [x] covered by existing tests (docs-only change)
## Potential risks
Docs-only change. Links are pinned to a commit SHA, so line numbers stay
stable, but they will drift from `HEAD` over time like the rest of the
doc's pinned links.
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
---------
Co-authored-by: Gokhan Tekkaya
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8
## What changed?
<!-- Describe what has changed in this PR -->
I reorganized our docs into `docs/{admin,architecture,development}`.
## Why?
<!-- Tell your future self why have you made these changes -->
We discussed this internally, but I believe this is a better
segmentation for the different audiences looking at our docs. I plan on
adding more stuff to docs/admin like metrics and dynamic config docs.
## How did you test it?
<!-- How have you verified this change? Tested locally? Added a unit
test? Checked in staging env? -->
I'm mainly looking for broken links.
- I went through each markdown file in docs manually.
- I looked through all inspection errors in the IDE.
- I looked at all references to "docs/" or "develop/" in our code.
## Potential risks
<!-- Assuming the worst case, what can be broken when deploying this
change to production? -->
## Documentation
<!-- Have you made sure this change doesn't falsify anything currently
stated in `docs/`? If significant
new behavior is added, have you described that in `docs/`? -->
## Is hotfix candidate?
<!-- Is this PR a hotfix candidate or does it require a notification to
be sent to the broader community? (Yes/No) -->
