I like it. Wording and placement are spot on. Thanks.
On Sun, May 12, 2024, 08:42 Simon Josefsson via Gnulib discussion list < bug-gnulib@gnu.org> wrote: > All, > > Our release announcements does not mention the git commit hash that was > used to prepare the release. While SHA1 is broken, I still think > including the commit hash provide some additional information that may > be useful further down the line, and hopefully including doesn't incur > too much cognitive load on the reader (that isn't already present..). > > I haven't pushed the attached patch since I'm not a native speaker. > Could someone suggest better wording, if needed? Or better placement in > the announcement? > > To read the result of the patch in context, take some earlier > announcement: > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/info-gnu/2024-03/msg00006.html > > and then consider that the patch would turn the following snippet (for a > hypothethical upcoming GNU inetutils release) text: > > This release was bootstrapped with the following tools: > Gnulib aacceb6eff > Autoconf 2.71 > Automake 1.16.5 > Bison 3.8.2 > M4 1.4.18 > Makeinfo 6.8 > Help2man 1.49.1 > Make 4.3 > Gzip 1.10 > Tar 1.34 > > and turn that into this: > > This release was built bootstrapped with the following tools > using inetutils git commit 524d4b6934db12b9f43be410d2f201fdb40cfc97: > > Gnulib aacceb6eff > Autoconf 2.71 > Automake 1.16.5 > Bison 3.8.2 > M4 1.4.18 > Makeinfo 6.8 > Help2man 1.49.1 > Make 4.3 > Gzip 1.10 > Tar 1.34 > > Does this make sense? Is the location in the announcement e-mail a good > one? This hides it a bit further down which I think makes sense. Few > readers care about git commit and bootstrapping versions, and the > information is related. The new version adds an empty line which I > think is more consistent with the other paragraphs. > > Thoughts? > > /Simon >
