chore(download): remove dead page

[avivkeller]

There are no backlinks to this page, and thus, it should be fine to delete.

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project	Deployment	Preview	Updated (UTC)
nodejs-org	Ready	Preview	Oct 3, 2025 9:26pm

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

This PR removes a dead documentation page that provides installation instructions for Node.js via various package managers. The page had no backlinks, making it safe to delete as part of code cleanup.

• Removes the entire package manager installation guide file
• Eliminates unused documentation content
• Cleans up the codebase by removing orphaned files

---

_{Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 76.59%. Comparing base (5140729) to head (184a398).
⚠️ Report is 17 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #8174   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   76.58%   76.59%           
=======================================
  Files         115      115           
  Lines        9602     9614   +12     
  Branches      322      323    +1     
=======================================
+ Hits         7354     7364   +10     
- Misses       2247     2249    +2     
  Partials        1        1           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[mikeesto]

We had a PR 3 weeks ago (#8114), so it seems like some folks are finding this page?

[avivkeller]

You can find the page via google search with specific terms, but it'll rarely show up since there are zero backlinks to this page. Thus, I think, it has little value.

[avivkeller]

Bump @nodejs/web

[ovflowd]

I wouldn't it call dead. It's supposed to be sunset with the Download Archive page, now as it got merged I wonder if we can sunset this one.

[ovflowd]

I'm neutral, approving. But can foresee people crying about this. Should we maybe just mark it as archived with a banner on the top?

[MattIPv4]

I think it's fine to remove, but I maybe worth adding a temporary redirect to the new downloads page so that any users who still have this link aren't completely lost (I'd prefer this to keeping the page around with an added warning)

[avivkeller]

How about:

1. Add a warning that it's obsolete
2. Remove in 1-2 months w/ redirect
   ?

[MattIPv4]

Can we look at analytics to see what the traffic is here? If it's significant I'd be more inclined to go with a banner, but if it's only a limited set of users from old links, I'd vote for just doing a redirect given the new pages have existed for a while now.

[MattIPv4]

Had a quick look at analytics, this route has had ~290k views in the last year, ~11k in the last 30 days. Top referrer by far (~180k of the ~290k) is Google. More traffic than I was expecting for sure, but I still dislike the idea of keeping a page around that we're not maintaining, that feels like risking misinforming users (and AI bots scraping our pages).

[AugustinMauroy]

I don't have strong opinion but there are some installation methods that we may want on download page

[araujogui]

Since users are still using this page, I think a temporary redirect would be a better choice.

[avivkeller]

Got it, I'll add a redirect as well, we can always remove it later

[bjohansebas]

LGTM

[araujogui]

LGTM