Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-perl-docs-dev-archive@perl.apache.org Received: (qmail 31501 invoked by uid 500); 2 Jul 2002 07:05:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Delivered-To: mailing list docs-dev@perl.apache.org Received: (qmail 31490 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2002 07:05:05 -0000 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020702090312.025848c0@pop.skynet.be> X-Sender: bk240371@pop.skynet.be X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 09:05:02 +0200 To: Stas Bekman From: Per Einar Ellefsen Subject: Re: announcing the prerelease Cc: docs-dev@perl.apache.org In-Reply-To: <3D214CE4.8030703@stason.org> References: <3D208BDA.5030606@stason.org> <5.1.0.14.2.20020701231024.025879c8@pop.skynet.be> <5.1.0.14.2.20020702082448.024d59e8@pop.skynet.be> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N At 08:49 02.07.2002, Stas Bekman wrote: >Per Einar Ellefsen wrote: >>At 06:47 02.07.2002, Stas Bekman wrote: >> >>>Per Einar Ellefsen wrote: >>> >>>>At 22:48 01.07.2002, Per Einar Ellefsen wrote: >>>> >>>>>This is why we ask for your help: take some time to browse the site, >>>>>and take note of: >>>>>- errors with browsers (crashes and/or rendering problems) >>>>>- usability: are you satisfied with the navigation and organization >>>>> of the content? >>>>>- your general satisfaction with how the site is. >>>> >>>> >>>>I think I should add: >>>> We also welcome "OK" reports with indication of the Operating >>>> System and Browser. >>>>rationale: These reports might help us isolate potential issues to a >>>>specific Browser/platform. >>> >>> >>>yes, but do we want lots of duplicated emails to wade through? If we do >>>that we need another file which maintains status, and people should be >>>advised to visit it first and skip the report if reported already, no? >> >>Yes, probably. I was thinking to keep track of those mails a little like >>the deprecated STATUS file we have now.. have a table to indicate what >>seems to work, and what not. > >so should we then have: >/site-issues.txt >/site-status.txt? > >I guess we will want to keep these files around after RC stage is over, so >if any questions arise afterwards we will be able to per-use these files. If we want to keep them, then we should add them to CVS and have them under release/ for now: /release/ISSUES /release/STATUS ? (we already have that one) but we need to make sure that these are updated continuously to the site.. quicker than the 6 hour turnaround.. so I'll do that manually. -- Per Einar Ellefsen per.einar@skynet.be --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org