cvs commit: www/en index.xsl

[Scott Long]

Bruce A. Mah wrote:
> 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 at .  :-)
> 
> 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.
> 
> 

Yes, not the end of the world, but I would like alpha to be put back on
the page until we stop generating release and support for it.  CVS HEAD
really has little relevancy to what is on the webpage; what happens
there doesn't become a realized part of the OS until a release is cut
from it.

Ideally there would be a www.freebsd.org/alpha that has a note descibing 
it as approaching end-of-life, and a www.freebsd.org/arm that describes
what we mean when we say that we support it.

Scott