sebb: > Not always, for example > > OpenOffice.org => ooo > > The usecase for the resourcename (perhaps resourceAlias) is to access SVN
Repositories are linked from the podling status page, though it is admittedly not as convenient to get there in two hops. Many recent podlings use Git -- often multiple repositories -- so linking to SVN is of limited use. If you really really want this I'm not going to object but I think it should be acknowledged that it's often inappropriate. David Crossley: > Also for poor Clutch to try to keep up with the inconsistency of project > names. Definitely the resource name is important for that purpose -- I'm simply questioning how much benefit we get from dedicating a field to it on the podling listing page. sebb once again: > >> > As for breaking things up into three pages... it may not be necessary > >> > once > >> > the rows shrink. > > The idea was not to lose all the existing data, most of which I think > is only displayed on that page currently. Everything on that page is also duplicated on the podling status pages. If certain values are not in sync, I think we should acknowledge that and fix our DRY problems rather than add more duplication. > The idea was to provide a summary in addition to the individual more > detailed sections. Hmm. To be honest, I don't think that's justified. I think it's too many resources providing slightly different views of the same information. Another option would be to add JavaScript show/hide to the podling index page, where clicking on a podling reveals expanded data. I'm not in favor of that (too much work) but I mention it as another alternative to creating new web pages. Marvin Humphrey --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
