Fix some links (#4976)

meetings/2018/LDM-2018-01-03.md

@@ -112,7 +112,7 @@ We should allow expression variables in queries, but keep them scoped to the ind
 
 [csharplang/issues/287](https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/issues/287)
 
-The [proposal](https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/master/proposals/caller-argument-expression.md) calls for an extra parameter with a default value (which is then replaced by the expression passed as an argument for the parameter designated in the attribute). This means that in a tie breaker situation, existing methods would match better than new ones that differ only by having this extra argument.
+The [proposal](https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/master/proposals/csharp-10.0/caller-argument-expression.md) calls for an extra parameter with a default value (which is then replaced by the expression passed as an argument for the parameter designated in the attribute). This means that in a tie breaker situation, existing methods would match better than new ones that differ only by having this extra argument.
 
 There are solutions to that for API owners:
 

meetings/2021/LDM-2021-02-22.md

@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@
 
 ### Global `using`s
 
-https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/master/proposals/GlobalUsingDirective.md
+https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/master/proposals/csharp-10.0/GlobalUsingDirective.md
 
 Today we discussed the proposed syntax and restrictions on the current feature specification. As checked in today, the proposal
 puts `global` after the `using` directive, which could be potentially ambiguous and require complicated parsing logic, as `global`

meetings/2021/LDM-2021-03-03.md

@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
 
 ### Natural type for lambdas
 
-https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/master/proposals/lambda-improvements.md
+https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/master/proposals/csharp-10.0/lambda-improvements.md
 
 Today we looked at a proposal around enhancing lambda expressions and method groups with a "natural type", which is helpful for several
 ASP.NET scenarios. Overall, the LDM has general support for making enhancements here: explaining how lambdas and method groups don't have

meetings/2021/LDM-2021-03-10.md

@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ We do like both of these proposals and want them both in the language, but will
 
 ### Parameterless struct constructors
 
-https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/master/proposals/parameterless-struct-constructors.md
+https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/master/proposals/csharp-10.0/parameterless-struct-constructors.md
 
 Finally today, we looked at the proposal for parameterless constructors. This proposal needs to make sure that it can handle what the general
 .NET ecosystem can do with struct constructors today, including private struct constructors.

meetings/2021/LDM-2021-03-29.md

@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@
 
 ### Parameterless struct constructors
 
-https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/struct-ctor-more/proposals/parameterless-struct-constructors.md
+https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/struct-ctor-more/proposals/csharp-10.0/parameterless-struct-constructors.md
 
 Today, we took a look at open questions in this proposal.
 
@@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ reflect more nuances, but we approve of the general goal: keep behavior unchange
 
 ### AsyncMethodBuilder
 
-https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/async-method-builders.md
+https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/csharp-10.0/async-method-builders.md
 
 We started today by questioning whether we can simplify this proposal a bit. Today, the proposal covers both a scoped version and
 a single-method version. The scoped version is complicated, and has a number of downsides:

meetings/2021/LDM-2021-04-12.md

@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ framework to `Slice` before it ships, would enable the feature in a much more ge
 
 ### Lambda improvements
 
-https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/lambda-improvements.md
+https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/csharp-10.0/lambda-improvements.md
 
 After some implementation work, this proposal is back to look at some more changes. One of the big ones is moving the return type to the left
 side of the parameter list. This makes the syntax analogous to our other signature declarations in C#, looking like an unnamed version of a

meetings/2021/LDM-2021-04-21.md

@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@
 
 ### Inferred types for lambdas and method groups
 
-https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/lambda-improvements.md  
+https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/csharp-10.0/lambda-improvements.md  
 https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/issues/4674
 
 Further implementation work has revealed a few potential breaking changes in giving lambdas and method groups a natural type (linked in the issue

meetings/2021/LDM-2021-04-28.md

@@ -13,8 +13,8 @@
 
 ### Open questions in record and parameterless structs
 
-https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/struct-ctor-more/proposals/parameterless-struct-constructors.md  
-https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/record-structs.md
+https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/struct-ctor-more/proposals/csharp-10.0/parameterless-struct-constructors.md  
+https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/csharp-10.0/record-structs.md
 
 #### Initializers with explicit constructors
 

meetings/2021/LDM-2021-06-02.md

@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ Existing proposal is accepted with the following clarifications:
 
 #### Lambda return type parsing
 
-https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/lambda-improvements.md
+https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/csharp-10.0/lambda-improvements.md
 
 In a previous LDM, we decided that lambda return types should go before the parameter list, as in `ReturnType (ParamType param) => { ... }`. This has
 presented some challenging parsing scenarios.

meetings/2021/LDM-2021-06-07.md

@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
 
 ### Runtime checks for parameterless struct constructors
 
-https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/parameterless-struct-constructors.md
+https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/csharp-10.0/parameterless-struct-constructors.md
 
 In testing parameterless struct constructors, we've found a new bug with `Activator.CreateInstance()` on older frameworks. This code
 will print `True, False` on .NET Framework 4.8:

meetings/2021/LDM-2021-06-21.md

@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
 
 ### Open questions for lambda return types
 
-https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/lambda-improvements.md
+https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/csharp-10.0/lambda-improvements.md
 
 #### Method type inference from return types
 

meetings/2021/LDM-2021-07-26.md

@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@
 
 ### Lambda conversion to System.Delegate
 
-https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/lambda-improvements.md
+https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/csharp-10.0/lambda-improvements.md
 
 We've received a few bug reports from customers on upgrading to a new version of the preview SDK that existing code, targeting .NET 5, was now failing to compile
 because code that previously chose an extension method with a strongly-typed delegate type was now binding to an instance method that took a `Delegate` instead.