From owner-cvs-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 4 10:49:54 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-doc@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-doc@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F75516A40F; Mon, 4 Dec 2006 10:49:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marc@blackend.org) Received: from abigail.blackend.org (blackend.org [212.11.35.229]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6121943CC9; Mon, 4 Dec 2006 10:49:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from marc@blackend.org) Received: from abigail.blackend.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by abigail.blackend.org (8.13.4/8.13.3) with ESMTP id kB4Ancpd054767; Mon, 4 Dec 2006 11:49:38 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from marc@abigail.blackend.org) Received: (from marc@localhost) by abigail.blackend.org (8.13.4/8.13.3/Submit) id kB4AnbnR054766; Mon, 4 Dec 2006 11:49:37 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from marc) Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 11:49:37 +0100 From: Marc Fonvieille To: Remko Lodder Message-ID: <20061204104937.GA54031@abigail.blackend.org> References: <200612031944.kB3Ji1Ma081957@repoman.freebsd.org> <45732F01.6040204@FreeBSD.org> <20061203223415.D69580@fledge.watson.org> <20061204074206.GE2564@elvandar.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20061204074206.GE2564@elvandar.org> X-Useless-Header: blackend.org X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.11-STABLE User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Cc: Remko Lodder , doc-committers@FreeBSD.org, Robert Watson , cvs-doc@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: www/share/sgml header.ent www/en/layout/css layout.css www/en index.xsl X-BeenThere: cvs-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the doc and www trees List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2006 10:49:54 -0000 On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 08:42:06AM +0100, Remko Lodder wrote: > > Hello Robert, > > Well do notice that I am not against the link itself, I am against > the way it was being done. doceng@ is not the proper entity for > these kind of things, they coordinate the development of documentation > and they assign/accept new commitbits. They cannot be seen as the > portmgr@ or core@ teams. The proper way is and should be by contacting > the webmasters mailinglist on www@ and ask for the change there. This > way the webmasters team can either commit it and/or do additional > things. > > As the "harm" already had been done, we should not remove the link > now (esp. with your reasoning), but I request that this will be > done the proper way the next time, and we should (www/doc team) really > consider some kind of guideline for new links (To avoid the overload > of information we once had with the old site). > I'm responsible of this situation, mainly cause of the lack of details in my commit log. If one wants to blame me, I'm fine with it cause I committed maybe too quickly. On another hand, if I have to do it again, I'd do it in the same manner cause the situation requested a fast response. About one week ago or more, Robert pinged doceng requesting this addition, one person approved the idea and then Robert asked for help to commit. This Saturday, I read the mentioned discussion and I had 3 possibilities: - ignoring the discussion; - asking Robert to go on www/doc@ and redo his request etc. (which is quite the same as the previous point); - committing quickly the change. So according to the Foundation situation, to the discussion with Robert, to the fact a new thread on www/doc@ would need another week to reach the same solution, I committed the change. I really think everyone would do the same, but once again I apologize for my too short and misleading commit log. -- Marc