cvs commit: doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/5-roadmap article.sgml

Scott Long scottl at
Mon Sep 17 15:52:16 PDT 2007

Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri wrote:
> On 9/18/07, Giorgos Keramidas <keramida at> wrote:
>> On 2007-09-18 00:12, Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri <almarrie at> wrote:
>>> On 9/18/07, Gabor Kovesdan <gabor at> 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 )

AS the author of this blasted document, I'll ask that 1) you stop 
arguing about nit-picky points about it, 2) don't change the title, and 
3) stop attaching so much significance to it.

Thanks =-)


More information about the cvs-all mailing list