From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 8 03:07:12 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4B031065678; Fri, 8 May 2009 03:07:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from so14k@valentine.liquidneon.com) Received: from valentine.liquidneon.com (valentine.liquidneon.com [216.87.78.132]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A80D58FC16; Fri, 8 May 2009 03:07:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from so14k@valentine.liquidneon.com) Received: by valentine.liquidneon.com (Postfix, from userid 1018) id AC87B8FE6E; Thu, 7 May 2009 20:40:43 -0600 (MDT) Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 20:40:43 -0600 From: Brad Davis To: Gabor Kovesdan Message-ID: <20090508024043.GM95179@valentine.liquidneon.com> References: <200905072203.n47M3INB002576@repoman.freebsd.org> <4A03768B.3050304@FreeBSD.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <4A03768B.3050304@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: doc-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-doc@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: www/en/news/status report-2009-01-2009-03.xml X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: **OBSOLETE** CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 May 2009 03:07:13 -0000 On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 02:02:19AM +0200, Gabor Kovesdan wrote: > Brad Davis escribió: > >brd 2009-05-07 22:03:18 UTC > > > > FreeBSD doc repository > > > > Modified files: > > en/news/status report-2009-01-2009-03.xml > > Log: > > Add missing paragraph tags [1] and grammer [2]. > > > > Submitted by: [1] gavin@ [2] miwi@ > > > > Revision Changes Path > > 1.4 +26 -16 www/en/news/status/report-2009-01-2009-03.xml > > > Hi Brad, > > the last time I offered help with status reports. I could do a review > before you publish the report. Others may help, as well. The last time > it seemed that you thought that post-publish reviews were fine but I > still think that it is better eliminating the problems before and not > publishing a report, which is full of grammatical and style errors. It > doesn't seem very nice. With preliminary reviews we could avoid building > failures and lots of commits fixing various nits. It has happened to the > last 2-3 status reports so I think it's time to improve the process. > Please note, that I'm not criticizing. I'm very grateful to you for your > work on status reports and I'm sure that so are others. I just want to > give you a helping hand to make this process smoother. Please consider > sending me the status reports in advance so that I can help you fixing > these nits. There's a Hungarian proverb, which says "more eyes can see > more". Sounds good.. I'll add you and someone else.. the usual problem is when I remember to do this I have already sent out a request for status reports.. rinse and repeat.. I'll get you on the alias right now. Regards, Brad Davis