Add Azure 2023Q3 status report

[lwhsu]

Summary

Sponsored by: The FreeBSD Foundation

[schakrabarti_microsoft.com]

website/content/en/status/report-2023-07-2023-09/azure.adoc

42

this is fixed now after bus dma tag fix.

[salvadore]

I made a few suggestions, but I approve. Feel free to make the commit when you feel it is ready.

website/content/en/status/report-2023-07-2023-09/azure.adoc

37

I believe that listing sponsors in the footer as usual is enough.

52

I find this sponsor list a bit confusing. I think simpler would be better:

Sponsor: Microsoft
Sponsor: The FreeBSD Foundation
'''

[salvadore]

website/content/en/status/report-2023-07-2023-09/azure.adoc

52

Without the ''' of course, sorry.

[lwhsu]

Update the status of arm64 and mention mana work.

[lwhsu]

@salvadore if possible, I'd like to keep the explanation about the detail of the sponsorship. One reason is that we (at least me) don't want to let the donors of the foundation have an impression that we directly use their money to fix the specified issues in a company. The truth is that MS provides the engineer resources and hardware resource to support FreeBSD in their environment, and we just use their resource to publish our official images (and what we do is actually modify the release codes to match our requirements.)

I agree that the first line can go (but it does provide a good explanation), but is there any good way we can make the foot both concise and clear? After all, that's what we've been using in several previous reports.

[lwhsu]

website/content/en/status/report-2023-07-2023-09/azure.adoc

42

Thanks for the info. I've update the list and make it the "fixed issues."

[salvadore]

@lwhsu: On second thought, keep it as you proposed initially. It does not hurt to give an extra explanation in the body of the report and if we always used that footer, then it should be clear enough.

[lwhsu]

In D42271#964401, @salvadore wrote:

@lwhsu: On second thought, keep it as you proposed initially. It does not hurt to give an extra explanation in the body of the report and if we always used that footer, then it should be clear enough.

Thanks!