[Doc] Make the background section concise and improve its formality #18928
Conversation
doc/guides/maintaining-V8.md
Outdated
| for maintaining the V8 branches in Node.js LTS and Current releases and how the | ||
| Node.js and V8 teams at Google can help. | ||
| different compared to the support horizon for Node.js. As a result, Node.js | ||
| needs to support a version of V8 longer than what upstream needs to support. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we can change a version with versions or multiple versions since we support one version of V8 for each release line.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for pointing out. I will revise it:)
doc/guides/maintaining-V8.md
Outdated
| LTS supported branch. | ||
|
|
||
| This document attempts to outline the current maintaining processes, proposes | ||
| a workflow for maintaining the V8 branches in both Node.js LTS and current releases, and |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could you be so kind and wrap this paragraph at 80 characters?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could you specify how can I achieve this without losing information. Also, I think this paragraph can be removed since the sections discussed in the paragraph were already explicitly stated in the document.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry, I meant wrap every line in the paragraph at 80 characters. Otherwise, our linter will complain :)
This document attempts to outline the current maintaining processes, proposes
a workflow for maintaining the V8 branches in both Node.js LTS and current
releases, and discusses how the Node.js and V8 teams at Google can help.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure, I will fix this. Sorry for the confusion and thank you again.
doc/guides/maintaining-V8.md
Outdated
| to support. V8 branches in Node.js lack of official maintaining process due | ||
| to a missing LTS supported branch. | ||
|
|
||
| This document attempts to outline the current maintaining processes, proposes |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit: maintenance processes seems more natural to me than maintaining processes
|
Hello @claudiorodriguez, I just uploaded a new commit to address the incorrect commit message format. Please let me know if I am still doing it wrong. thanks |
mmarchini
added
the
author ready
|
Landed in a27e6d7, thanks! 😄 |
PR-URL: #18928 Reviewed-By: Claudio Rodriguez <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
PR-URL: nodejs#18928 Reviewed-By: Claudio Rodriguez <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
PR-URL: nodejs#18928 Reviewed-By: Claudio Rodriguez <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
PR-URL: nodejs#18928 Reviewed-By: Claudio Rodriguez <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Backport-PR-URL: #22380 PR-URL: #18928 Reviewed-By: Claudio Rodriguez <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Improve the writing quality of the background section in maintaining-V8.md