Aristedes Maniatis wrote: > Could I ask that someone with appropriate access rights review the state > of release documentation for 9.1 beta. It is very confused. > > > 1. This page is the best information available: > http://www.freebsd.org/releases/9.1R/schedule.html > > 2. The link from the front page ( http://www.freebsd.org/ ) is labelled > "Upcoming: 9.1-BETA1" but goes to a page which is mostly about existing > releases, not the next release. http://www.freebsd.org/where.html#helptest > > 3. Clicking on the "view" link for the 9.1 information on that page > takes you to http://wiki.freebsd.org/Releng/9.1TODO which looks a lot > like the information in point [1] but wrong/old. > > 4. On http://www.freebsd.org/where.html#helptest there is a link to > "FreeBSD Snapshot Releases" for people interested in "FreeBSD-CURRENT > (AKA 10.0-CURRENT)". But following the link takes you to a page where > you get linked to "9-CURRENT, 8-STABLE, 7-STABLE, and 6-STABLE" snapshots. > > > > It is possible I'm just stuck in the past, but I've never been able to > navigate the 'new' bowling ball branded FreeBSD site nearly as well as > the older incarnation. And yes, I can eventually figure it all out... > but this information could be a whole lot clearer. I design information > presentation for a living, so perhaps I'm picky about these things, but > I do think that confusion could turn people away from my favourite > operating system. >
Hi I can not agree more about what you say, but the pages you mention still let you find what you want and this pages do have a release/modify date stamp somewhere and they are not thaaat old worse and worse it gets when looking for documentation all this pages do not have a date or indication to what version they refer to, most are old, some even wrong for actual releases even if recognizing the work spent by all to write the pages, also recognizing that all docs are well written, organized and understandable, all of it is worthless when not up to date, wrong or incomplete for actual releases (either OS or ports) or merely theoretical this is still more important because a lot of general product docs for, lets say for example xorg or kde, do not apply fully to their FreeBSD ports, forcing the user finding his way elsewhere or getting stuck with eventually not working system or as you say leading to turn away from freeBSD one step forward would be, adding at least the last modified date to each document, but not in tiny light grey chars at the bottom, but big and fat on top of the doc, so at last the user would have the possibility to consider it being old or new documentation []s Hans -- H +55 11 4249.2222
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
