Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:33:14 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Status reports - why not regularly? Message-ID: <20040113223314.684c9ca4@Magellan.Leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040113135122.26227E-100000@fledge.watson.org> References: <400428DC.2060108@theatre.msu.edu> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040113135122.26227E-100000@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 13:56:53 -0500 (EST)
Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> wrote:
> The "summarize the commits" would also be an excellent approach, but it
> will be a lot more labor intensive.
Don't we have something like this already? We just need to provide 'some
kind of a diff' of bmah's work. At least from an end-user point of view
that's all what's needed (they want to know: X is new, Y is improved).
It may not show much of progress in public available places, and may not
be attractive to developers which are back home from a holiday, but more
tech-savvy users (or people which want to get more tech-savvy) which
want to know what happens under the hood of FreeBSD read cvs-all (at
least I did this back in the 3.x days to learn more about FreeBSD).
This doesn't cover the people between the above mentioned parties (those
which aren't able to understand if a commit fixes a specific bug or
not), but I've seen no description of the intended audience so far...
BTW.: Such information should IMHO be in-tree and with timestamps
(perhaps with an entry for the introduction of a bug too), like
UPDATING.
Bye,
Alexander.
--
I will be available to get hired in April 2004.
http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net
GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91 3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040113223314.684c9ca4>