Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 18 Sep 2007 01:39:01 +0300
From:      "Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri" <almarrie@gmail.com>
To:        "Giorgos Keramidas" <keramida@freebsd.org>
Cc:        doc-committers@freebsd.org, Gabor Kovesdan <gabor@freebsd.org>, cvs-all@freebsd.org, cvs-doc@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/5-roadmap article.sgml
Message-ID:  <499c70c0709171539o284382abw34e856f94cd6e6d0@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20070917222637.GB3621@kobe.laptop>
References:  <200709172102.l8HL2hEx089576@repoman.freebsd.org> <46EEEC96.1010007@FreeBSD.org> <499c70c0709171412w5c812f47h8145124facbf1ade@mail.gmail.com> <20070917222637.GB3621@kobe.laptop>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 9/18/07, Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On 2007-09-18 00:12, Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri <almarrie@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On 9/18/07, Gabor Kovesdan <gabor@freebsd.org> wrote:
> >>Giorgos Keramidas escribi??:
> >>> keramida    2007-09-17 21:02:43 UTC
> >>>
> >>>   FreeBSD doc repository
> >>>
> >>>   Modified files:
> >>>     en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/5-roadmap article.sgml
> >>>   Log:
> >>>   Avoid using "It was", but use a more explicit reference to the
> >>>   version-guide article in the abstract of 5-roadmap.  This way
> >>>   the text is a bit less confusing.
> >>
> >> Shouldn't this be nuked? I remember it came to the topic some time ago,
> >> but we won't have
> >> any new releases from 5.X any more and it has only a historical
> >> significance.
> >
> > When you go on and keep reading, and follow the links you feel the 5.x
> > task isn't completed yet, and I feel it's misleading, I would suggest
> > you make docs for FreeBSD 7.x Road Map or even 8.x
>
> That's odd.  After reading this in the current abstract:
>
>       <para> This document is now mostly of historical value.  It
>         presented a roadmap for the development of &os;'s &t.releng.5;
>         branch.  It was originally written in February 2003 (between
>         the 5.0 and 5.1 releases), and was intended to provide a plan
>         for making the &t.releng.5; branch <quote>stable</quote>, both
>         in terms of code quality and finalization of various
>         APIs/ABIs.  For a different perspective, the article
>         <ulink url="&url.articles.version-guide;">
>           <quote>Choosing the &os; Version That Is Right For You</quote>
>         </ulink>
>         may be of interest.  The version-guide article was written in August
>         2005 (two and a half years later), and it contains a section
>         discussing how these plans and events actually unfolded, as well as
>         some lessons learned.</para>
>
> it was obvious to me that the article is *not* describing the current
> state of affairs.  Any suggestions about improving the text to make it
> less confusing for people who just happen to stumble upon it now, are
> very welcome :)

I think if you change the title itself it will be good idea.

The Road Map for 5-STABLE to The Road Map for 5-STABLE ( historical value )

-- 
Regards,

-Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri
Arab Portal
http://www.WeArab.Net/



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?499c70c0709171539o284382abw34e856f94cd6e6d0>