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
