On Fri, 2008-03-21 at 15:35 +1300, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> While we are at it what about the text and links following the releases
> table.
>
> * The Pending bugs link might be useful for 2.x.
Maybe. We had that for 2.5, but I never found that link to give any
really meaningful results. But we also keep a list of the known
important bugs in the release notes..
> * The fixed bugs list is getting so long is it still useful for the
> stable releases? changesets may show a better list of fixed major bugs.
Agreed. And the changesets links to relevant bug reports...
> What about adding a link to the latest production releases page?
It's fine for me to make HEAD link to the latest STABLE release.
> Also:
> v3/HEAD/make.sh errors with 'ls *.diff' no sch files.
The diffs has not yet been adjusted for bzr.
> and there are no release notes made for head, so linking to them is
> useless.
There should be a template, with most sections "TO BE WRITTEN", and
filled in when the tree is branched.
> Yes remove or yes not discuss?
Both. What release labels to acutally use and what they means is a
separate discussion from making the web site make sense.
> It would mean removing the mention of "First PRE release" from the
> table. Which is probably a good idea to remove from that particular page
> IMHO.
Yes. It's quite irrelevant there.
> >> Should we remove date columns from the "Development Versions" table at
>
> I'd remove the 'planned release date' though in favour of a link to the
> RoadMap.
Agreed.
Regards
Henrik
Received on Fri Mar 21 2008 - 14:03:50 MDT
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Apr 01 2008 - 13:00:10 MDT