Jose Luis Rivero wrote:
I'm for working in xxxx.y and draft/ until the stable release is done
(if there is no special cases like currently). Your idea can help people
to understand what a beta release for Gentoo means but please apply it
along with not overwritting current handbooks until the release is
Maybe you can make a new 'disclaimer' value, beta_release (or whatever)
and put it instead of draft, which usually refers to docs non finalized
or waiting for review, which is not the case.
I, personally, hate the whole business of copying stuff to draft/ and
then back again. It's a pain, and there's some risk of forgetting stuff
or not getting it moved or forgetting to delete old files (this happened
once or twice with this release). That's why I dispensed with doing
draft/2008.0/ and just went straight to the toplevel dir.
However, draft is nice to have a workspace for committing networked HB
changes to make sure they don't get lost. That's the only reason I can
think of for not punting it entirely.
I suppose if we were on git, it'd be easier to make our commits but not
push them onto the final versions. Maybe. Who knows.
As I see it, we have a few options:
1. Keep the "draft" disclaimer for the beta handbooks, the only live
2. Add listings for "beta" in addition to "latest stable" (really old)
in our index, and link to them.
3. Add disclaimer to TOC for beta status. Replaces(?) draft disclaimer.
4. Ditch the draft disclaimer, and instead just consider each handbook a
"release" handbook. We just use the beta stage/file/mirror names. Since
the only thing that's in testing is the CDs, really.
I'm all for 1, 3, or 4. My personal favorite is 4. Thoughts?