Re: download pages review

Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
> 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..

I found it useful when I first encountered squid to quickly identify the
bugs in my squid version.

>
>> * 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.

Done.

>
>> 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.

Okay. Done.

>
>> 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.

Done.

>
>>>> 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.

Done.

>
> Regards
> Henrik
>

-- 
Please use Squid 2.6STABLE17+ or 3.0STABLE1+
There are serious security advisories out on all earlier releases.