It's now feasible to use igor to spellcheck this document. There are
still a few reported issues, but I belive they are false positives due
to nested <step>s.
Rewrite the prose description of Tiers to be structured as bullet
lists of guarantees to users from the Project, guarantees to
developers from the Project, and obligations on developers.
This includes definitions of userland and kernel ABIs as well as
documenting our current practice of ABI stability.
The committments for ports are still vague and will require further
refinement.
Move the Tier status of architectures out of the committers guide and
into a table on the platforms page the website listing the Tier for
each architecture across currently supported stable branches as well
as the projected Tiers for the next stable branch (in this case,
13.x). The table also lists individual TARGET_ARCH values to permit
more granularity in Tier definitions (e.g. hard-float vs soft-float).
Update the Unsupported Platforms table to only list removed
architectures and include the last supported release of these
architectures. This required adding anchors for relevant releases on
the releases page.
Reviewed by: bcr
Discussed with: developers@
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D22439
Summary: This rule doesn't seem to make sense any more. Let's remove it.
Reviewers: #portmgr, adamw, mat
Reviewed By: #portmgr, adamw, mat
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D21158
The summary of the license policy in the commiters guide is a good place
to get started, but the buck stops with the license policy. We enourage
questions before making commits if the policy is not clear.
Approved by: core (bcr, jhb, imp)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D19515
This is based on LLVM's Code Review policy. It differs it not requiring
review for non-trivial changes.
Reviewed by: bcr (verbal), allanjude, imp, jhb
Approved by: core
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D16730
- Most notably don't require talking to core@ to take on maintainership.
- Merge an FAQ into the main body of the text
- Wordsmith
- Remove references to CVS
Approved by: core
The content at administration.html discussed hats, not maintainers.
While certain people do tend to own various areas, this is covered by
MAINTAINERS, Herald, etc. Just remove the reference to administration
since its off-topic in this context.
Approved by: core
from the patch included with that bug report, mostly by being more
general and hopefully head off some bikeshed discussions.
PR: 228353
Submitted by: John W. O'Brien <john@saltant.com>
- remove an aside about reading the mailing list. This is taken care of
by the later sentence about reading revision history
- use a slightly stronger admonition ("important" instead of "note") for
the comments about not sending mail directly to the maintainer.
- Refer explicitly to the 'MAINTAINERS' file at the root of the tree
- Use the language of "asking for a review" instead of "sending the
change to them" which, again, encourages a more public interaction.
- Remove the weasel language "it may help" and just encourage people to
scan the history
Even though we don't have currently have active seeds some people still
use the old ones. In addition we may restore creating new ones.
Update the text a bit to reflect that you can use the mirror. Move the
text together into one section, and keep the note about alternatives.
Requested by: kib
There are no such supported branches. Those that need to merge to such
branches can get the information from the documentation archive.
While here, remove an incorrect note that depth cannnot be reduced
(it can be).
We have several lists of important branches. Rather than having to
update them all just mention the important part. Another option might
be to change this to a link with more detailed information.
Perforce no longer provides server binaries for FreeBSD and we haven't
used Perforce for project development in several years.
Reviewed by: bjk (previous version)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D15392
I missed this in r51635 when we removed 'All Rights Reserved' from the
preferred license. The phrase is no longer needed and has no legal
meaning now that the Buenos Aires Convention is no longer in force.
