CFD: additions to the PR submission article

[Simon L. Nielsen]

On 2005.04.10 22:56:48 -0500, Mark Linimon wrote:

> Unless there are any objections I intend to commit these changes once
> the freeze is lifted.

Looks good to me, except a few style issues, as noted below.

> Index: article.sgml
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /home/FreeBSD/dcvs/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/problem-reports/article.sgml,v
> retrieving revision 1.36
> diff -u -r1.36 article.sgml
> --- article.sgml	15 Jan 2005 02:16:42 -0000	1.36
> +++ article.sgml	11 Apr 2005 03:53:25 -0000
[...]
> +      <listitem>
> +	<para>Individual applications that are not in the base system
> +	  but are instead part of the &os; Ports Collection (category
> +	  <literal>ports</literal>).  Most of these applications are
> +	  not written by &os; developers; what &os; provides is merely
> +	  a framework for installing the application.  Therefore, you
> +	  should only report a problem to the &os; developers when you
> +	  believe the problem is &os;-specific; otherwise, you should
> +	  report it to the authors of the software.</para>
> +      </listitem>
> +

No need for an empty line here.

> +    </itemizedlist>
> +
> +    <para>Then you should ascertain whether or not the problem is
> +      timely.  There are few things

This line could be made longer.

> +      that will annoy a developer more than receiving a problem report
> +      about a bug she has already fixed.</para>
> +
> +    <para>If the problem is in the base system, you should first read
> +      the FAQ section on
> +      <ulink url="&url.books.faq;/introduction.html#LATEST-VERSION">
> +      &os; versions</ulink>, if you are not already familiar with
> +      the topic.  It is not possible for &os; to fix problems in
> +      anything other than certain recent branches of the base system,
> +      so filing a bug report about an older version will probably
> +      only result in a developer advising you to upgrade to a
> +      supported version to see if the problem still recurs.  The
> +      Security Officer team maintains the
> +      <ulink url="http://www.freebsd.org/security/">list of supported

s/freebsd.org/FreeBSD.org/ - there are some entities that might be
used (url.base) but I'm actually not really sure if that would fit
here...

-- 
Simon L. Nielsen
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-doc/attachments/20050411/abbb822d/attachment.sig>