Math Reviews used to be much more colorful. In the 1950s, Haefliger was working on groupoids, developing a lot of what is now fundamental in the theory of stacks. Palais reviewed a 1958 paper of Haefliger's, concluding with,
The first four chapters of the paper are concerned with an extreme, Bourbaki-like generalization of the notion of foliation. After some twenty-five pages and several hundred preliminary definitions, the reader finds that a foliation of $X$ is to be an element of the zeroth cohomology space of $X$ with coefficients in a certain sheaf of groupoids. Holonomy, the Reeb-Ehresmann stability theorems, etc., are then generalized to this setting. While such generalization has its place and may in fact prove useful in the future, it seems unfortunate to the reviewer that the author has so materially reduced the accessibility of the results, mentioned above, of Chapter V, by couching them in a ponderous formalism that will undoubtedly discourage many otherwise interested readers.
