Feedback on Tools and Libraries

I have been looking around for a libraries for Swift and I found maybe two opportunities:

1. Should not we have a link on each tile coming out on the website? E.g. on the [website](https://graphql.org/community/tools-and-libraries/?tags=swift-objective-c-ios) I can see the title and the description of a client, but there's no link. Although, the link exists in the [source markdown](https://github.com/graphql/graphql.github.io/tree/source/src/code/language-support/swift-objective-c-ios/client) file. It should link both the website and the Github repo.
2. Should not we have a tag to mark a library as old or stale or whatever we want to say to indicate there's no active development? Surely, I can infer going on the Github. website, but the website could be helpful. In [this case](https://github.com/graphql/graphql.github.io/blob/source/src/code/language-support/swift-objective-c-ios/client/graphqlite-ios.md), for instance, the website link is broken, the homepage contains no info and the GitHub repo is wrong. Despite the [CocoaPod](https://cocoapods.org/pods/GraphQLite) still exists, it's unlikely there are users of this library.
3. For those clients or servers where a GitHub repo exists, the readme could be pulled automatically, as much as npmjs.org does.

I think it would improve a lot the experience of the user.

Examinez le markdown source sous src/code/language-support/swift-objective-c-ios/client, y compris graphqlite-ios.md, et comparez-le à la page Tools and Libraries rendue. L’issue propose un travail distinct pour les liens des tuiles, les indicateurs de bibliothèques obsolètes et le contenu automatique de README ; déterminez d’abord quelle proposition a une portée approuvée et définissez comment l’achèvement serait vérifié.

Rédigé par le modèle d'indexation à partir du texte de l'issue.