Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 12 May 2006 08:55:32 -0700
From:      "Bruce A. Mah" <bmah@freebsd.org>
To:        Ceri Davies <ceri@submonkey.net>, Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>, "Bruce A. Mah" <bmah@freebsd.org>, doc-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-doc@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: www/en index.xsl
Message-ID:  <4464AFF4.8030506@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <20060512130211.GA89089@submonkey.net>
References:  <200605120254.k4C2s3BS052028@repoman.freebsd.org> <4464020F.3000609@freebsd.org> <446403FE.8050908@freebsd.org> <20060512130211.GA89089@submonkey.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

[-- Attachment #1 --]
If memory serves me right, Ceri Davies wrote:
> On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 05:41:50AM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
>> Bruce A. Mah wrote:
>>> If memory serves me right, Andre Oppermann wrote:
>>>> andre       2006-05-12 02:54:03 UTC
>>>>
>>>>  FreeBSD doc repository (src committer)
>>>>
>>>>  Modified files:
>>>>    en                   index.xsl 
>>>>  Log:
>>>>  Alpha has left the building. Add ARM and rearrange the list of 
>>>>  architectures
>>>>  a bit.
>>> I wonder if the !alpha part was a little premature?  Yes, the alpha
>>> kernel bits are gone from HEAD, but they're still around on RELENG_5 and
>>> RELENG_6, and we're still planning to do releases from both of those
>>> codelines.  The first release that won't include alpha will be 7.0, and
>>> its release cycle doesn't even *start* for over a year.
>>>
>>> Just a thought...
>> There are like two remaining Alpha users and we most likely won't gain
>> any new ones in the foreseeable future. Though we are compiling releases
>> according to jhb it isn't even clear they actually work on Alpha.  It's
>> not actively maintained anymore.  It really has left the building and there
>> is no point in advertising it on our homepage instead of on some random
>> tombstone somewhere out in the past architectures graveyard.
> 
> That's as may be, but you really should have gotten approval from a doc
> committer for this commit.  Bruce is one, he disagrees, you should back
> it out.

Just for the record, I didn't even notice what set of commit bits andre
has, and I would have sent exactly the same comment even if he was a
member of doceng@ or core@.  :-)

It's also true that the sun is still going to come up tomorrow no matter
what winds up on the homepage, so I'd like people not to get *too*
worked up over this, regardless of how they feel.

Peace,

Bruce.



[-- Attachment #2 --]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEZK/52MoxcVugUsMRAhIpAJ4/1OD7YQTZ+VpTHUtcT7J/MYrMLwCggO6x
YkEk21fVjat6OtqUAVhdJoE=
=l+u8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4464AFF4.8030506>