On 2004.01.24 01:08:46 -0600, Mark Johnston wrote: > If you have a minute, please read through this message and give me a > sense of what you think. In particular, please think about: > > - Subject matter - too narrow? too broad? should I cover the -current > list instead of cvs-src, or try to combine both into one report? While it would be nice to cover -current also, I think just cvs-src is fine. -current gets a very large amount of emails, so if -current is included in the summarary I think there is the risk that the report puts too large a workload on the author. > - Prose - too technical? not technical enough? too flowery? too plain? I think it was fine, it covered the important points without going into uneeded details. > - Commits covered - Did I miss anything I should have included, or > include things I should have skipped? I read the source commit mails, and I can't remember any important subjects which has been missed. > - Impartial? I've tried not to attribute consensus and opinions where > they weren't very clear; have I succeeded? I think that was very successful. Especially the 'Filenames and line numbers added to panic output' debate got a bit heated, and I think you described it very impartial (and only the important points). > - Interest - would you be interested in seeing something like this > produced weekly? Defiantly. Nice work! (especially doing it and not just talking about doing it :-) ). -- Simon L. Nielsen FreeBSD Documentation Team
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:39 UTC