proposal: new approach
bruce.dubbs at gmail.com
Fri Jul 24 17:29:50 PDT 2009
DJ Lucas wrote:
>>> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> I understand your point, but I was thinking of the future. It's true that
>> package we update now should be against 6.5. The absence of a line that
>> "Last Reviewed means that it was before 6.5.
>> In the future, if we get behind again, then the Last Checked line does
>> some useful information.
>> For the present, it gives a quick check (without searching through 200+
>> that a package was reviewed recently and doesn't need further review right
>> I think its a reasonable approach, even if we want to remove it for a
> It certainly should not be rendered in the finished book, however, a
> simple comment under the first block, for each package certainly wouldn't
> hurt anything.
> <!-- Last checked against LFS-6.5. -->
Well my thought was to render it so you didn't have to look at tickets/source,
but you did trigger an idea.
How about putting in a temporary note with a
and then be able to make that render or not via the xsl.
More information about the blfs-dev