Hi Natalie,
The logo is somewhat separate - it is part of the overall site
configuration, not a part of the report. This sample from John is
just using the current default.
I agree it is a good idea for our little built by logo to default to
one that matches the main logo on the site, it'
, 23 Dec 2006 07:13:20 +0800
Subject: Re: Feedback Needed on Release Reporting Tool
Here's version 2:
http://people.apache.org/~jtolentino/release-reports/MockReport2.html
You can also find the corresponding xdoc here:
http://people.apache.org/~jtolentino/release-reports/MockReport2.xml
I
On 24/12/2006, at 2:00 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
- build status report (for developers, from Continuum, things that
need immediate attention like broken build, failing tests, failing
ITs, failing checks)
This report is strictly a record of something that is ready to
release. Once all the
On 22 Dec 06, at 5:13 PM 22 Dec 06, John Tolentino wrote:
Here's version 2:
I would still put the issues resolved on the top, I think that's what
people looking at new releases want to see first. "Was my issue
fixed?" is what they are asking.
Jason.
http://people.apache.org/~jtolenti
On 22 Dec 06, at 4:48 PM 22 Dec 06, Brett Porter wrote:
On 23/12/2006, at 9:13 AM, John Tolentino wrote:
The vote is an indicator that we're prioritizing what the community
needs/wants to get fixed. I think this would be of interest for those
making a vote for the release, if the issues the
On 23 Dec 06, at 2:03 AM 23 Dec 06, Stephane Nicoll wrote:
Tagging the sources with a standardized scheme and use it would be the
best for CVS I think.
Ultimately we decide what tool is helping with the release, the API
created for making releases must shape this information in a standard
On 22 Dec 06, at 5:28 PM 22 Dec 06, John Tolentino wrote:
I see. So if a project is using CVS, they have to rely on their
process having to tag a revision first. I used the revision on the
checkout instructions in the mock reports, but like you said, this is
only applicable to SVN.
No, you c
Tagging the sources with a standardized scheme and use it would be the
best for CVS I think.
Stéphane
On 12/23/06, John Tolentino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I see. So if a project is using CVS, they have to rely on their
process having to tag a revision first. I used the revision on the
checkou
Well, the one thing you can use in CVS is the date + branch. But I
think tagging it and then either promoting, removing or retaining the
tag is acceptable as part of the staging process for a release. You
can do the same thing in other systems.
- Brett
On 23/12/2006, at 10:28 AM, John Tole
I see. So if a project is using CVS, they have to rely on their
process having to tag a revision first. I used the revision on the
checkout instructions in the mock reports, but like you said, this is
only applicable to SVN.
On 12/23/06, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I don't think we c
I don't think we can really do much special with the label - it just
needs to be something that won't change in that system (under the
assumption the user doesn't deliberately change it, we can't guard
against it).
So, an SVN revision number is valid, but so is a URL to a tag, as is
a CVS
By the way, I need some help with the "labels" for the SCM. I'm not
familiar with other SCM tools and would appreciate some suggestions on
how to generally approach this one.
On 12/23/06, John Tolentino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Here's version 2:
http://people.apache.org/~jtolentino/release-
Here's version 2:
http://people.apache.org/~jtolentino/release-reports/MockReport2.html
You can also find the corresponding xdoc here:
http://people.apache.org/~jtolentino/release-reports/MockReport2.xml
I didn't change the left navigation yet as we're still deciding on
which reports gets li
I see what you mean. I'll post the second version of the mock report
and let's group it from there. :-)
On 12/23/06, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 23/12/2006, at 9:13 AM, John Tolentino wrote:
>
> The vote is an indicator that we're prioritizing what the community
> needs/wants to
On 23/12/2006, at 9:13 AM, John Tolentino wrote:
The vote is an indicator that we're prioritizing what the community
needs/wants to get fixed. I think this would be of interest for those
making a vote for the release, if the issues they want fixed will go
in.
I think these really should be
On 12/23/06, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I like it, especially all being on one page as Jason said.
Just trying to get to the bottom of the requirements... so this is
something that would always be generated and would measure
"releasability"? ie, you look at the page and see that the
I like it, especially all being on one page as Jason said.
Just trying to get to the bottom of the requirements... so this is
something that would always be generated and would measure
"releasability"? ie, you look at the page and see that there are
still 5 issues open for the current versi
TECTED]>
To: "Maven Developers List"
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 11:19:44 +0800
Subject: Feedback Needed on Release Reporting Tool
Hi Everyone,
Been working on a tool to generate reports for release candidates and
this is a mock of what it should look like:
http://people.apache.org/~jtolentino/rel
te: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 11:19:44 +0800
Subject: Feedback Needed on Release Reporting Tool
Hi Everyone,
Been working on a tool to generate reports for release candidates and
this is a mock of what it should look like:
http://people.apache.org/~jtolentino/release-reports/MockReport.html
We can send
John Tolentino wrote:
[snip]
Right. I personally don't like raw maven output on such a page - the
docck report plugin
should just generate a normal report page, preferrably embed it in
this page.
I'll see what I can do on translating docck return values into a
suitable report.
Ok cool.
On 12/19/06, John Tolentino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Been working on a tool to generate reports for release candidates and
this is a mock of what it should look like:
http://people.apache.org/~jtolentino/release-reports/MockReport.html
We can send this generated page to the dev l
On 12/20/06, Kenney Westerhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi, some more comments:
First: very nice, extremely handy for voting.
Jason van Zyl wrote:
> On 18 Dec 06, at 10:19 PM 18 Dec 06, John Tolentino wrote:
>
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>> Been working on a tool to generate reports for release candida
Hi, some more comments:
First: very nice, extremely handy for voting.
Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 18 Dec 06, at 10:19 PM 18 Dec 06, John Tolentino wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Been working on a tool to generate reports for release candidates and
this is a mock of what it should look like:
http://people.a
On 19 Dec 06, at 10:38 AM 19 Dec 06, John Casey wrote:
On 12/19/06, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Maybe some SCM information, what system is being used and the "label"
instead of revision which is SVN specific and a link, if possible, to
that revision in the SCM. For SVN and CVS t
On 12/19/06, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Maybe some SCM information, what system is being used and the "label"
instead of revision which is SVN specific and a link, if possible, to
that revision in the SCM. For SVN and CVS this is easy with ViewCVS.
IMO, it needs to be more tha
On 18 Dec 06, at 10:19 PM 18 Dec 06, John Tolentino wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Been working on a tool to generate reports for release candidates and
this is a mock of what it should look like:
http://people.apache.org/~jtolentino/release-reports/MockReport.html
We can send this generated page to the
Hi Everyone,
Been working on a tool to generate reports for release candidates and
this is a mock of what it should look like:
http://people.apache.org/~jtolentino/release-reports/MockReport.html
We can send this generated page to the dev list when we call for a release.
I appreciate any feedba
27 matches
Mail list logo
