The podling summary status page (projects/index.html) is now generated
from the file site-author/podlings.xml, rather than
site-author/projects/index.xml (which has been retired)
podlings.xml contains all the information that was in index.xml, but
is much easier to update and process, because it c
+1 from me.
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 1:00 PM, David Lutterkort wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I just uploaded the first release candidate for Deltacloud 0.4.1. The rc is
> available from http://people.apache.org/~lutter/deltacloud/0.4.1/rc1/
>
> Please vote on the release candidate by Saturday, 2011-10-07 15
The voting period has now closed. There were no additional votes on this list;
thus, the vote is successful.
The following are the IPMC members who voted +1 on the DEV list:
Ate Douma: +1
Ross Gardler: +1
Hadrian Zbarcea: +1
>-Original Message-
>From: Franklin, Matthew B. [mailto:mfr
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 8:49 PM, Donald Whytock wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Christian Grobmeier
> wrote:
>> There is always:
>> http://people.apache.org/committers-by-project.html#ooo
>
> This isn't necessarily the same as the members of the PPMC, is it?
No at the moment it is all
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Christian Grobmeier
wrote:
> There is always:
> http://people.apache.org/committers-by-project.html#ooo
This isn't necessarily the same as the members of the PPMC, is it?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 8:31 PM, Donald Whytock wrote:
> There's been talk on the OpenOffice dev list about a public list of
> PPMC members. Now that there's an overall podlings.xml registery,
> should there perhaps be a standard for something similar at the
> podling level, that a general script
There's been talk on the OpenOffice dev list about a public list of
PPMC members. Now that there's an overall podlings.xml registery,
should there perhaps be a standard for something similar at the
podling level, that a general script can use if it's there? Perhaps
something along the lines of
in
Cleared for import. Thanks.
-> richard
On 9/30/11 12:55 PM, Richard S. Hall wrote:
Please review the following contribution for IP clearance:
http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/felix-lightweight-httpservice.html
Thank you.
-> richard
---
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Christian Grobmeier
wrote:
> Ok, for you. Not me. I believe people coming from outside are confused
> by this navigation too. Of course I cannot prove it, but all the
> website I like have easier navigation.
So what's the use case for the RHS column? Presumably
>> - 95+ visible links on a webpage visible navigation is a mess for me.
>
> It's not much longer than the LHS navigation, and would be a similar
> length if the non-project entries were removed as previously proposed.
It not about length. Its about confusion level. 40 links on the left,
40 on the
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 2:21 PM, Martijn Dashorst
wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 1:57 PM, sebb wrote:
>>> Thats exactly what I mean with a mess. Hope it clarifies a bit, b/c I
>>> thought about it a pretty long time.
>>
>> I agree that the LHS menu is confusing and messy, but for me, the RHS
>>
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 1:57 PM, sebb wrote:
>> Thats exactly what I mean with a mess. Hope it clarifies a bit, b/c I
>> thought about it a pretty long time.
>
> I agree that the LHS menu is confusing and messy, but for me, the RHS
> list is simple and useful.
For me the RHS list is not useful at
On 10 October 2011 12:18, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 12:28 PM, sebb wrote:
>> On 10 October 2011 09:09, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 4:58 AM, sebb wrote:
On 10 October 2011 02:02, David Crossley wrote:
> sebb wrote:
>> Christian
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 12:28 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 10 October 2011 09:09, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 4:58 AM, sebb wrote:
>>> On 10 October 2011 02:02, David Crossley wrote:
sebb wrote:
> Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>
> > I've not started looking a
On 8 October 2011 05:25, David Crossley wrote:
> Donald Whytock wrote:
>> sebb wrote:
>> > There ought to be a tapestry.html file locally; may need to generate a
>> > dummy one if the original cannot be recovered (or never existed).
>>
>> Weird...there IS a Tapestry page: http://tapestry.apache.or
On 10 October 2011 09:09, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 4:58 AM, sebb wrote:
>> On 10 October 2011 02:02, David Crossley wrote:
>>> sebb wrote:
Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> I've not started looking at generating projects/index.xml yet.
>>>
>>>
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 4:58 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 10 October 2011 02:02, David Crossley wrote:
>> sebb wrote:
>>> Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>>>
>>> > I've not started looking at generating projects/index.xml yet.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Reading the past mails shows me you are +1 to commit the layout
>> That would probably be fine - I'd like to see it before endorsing it fully.
>
> It would have been better to do it in a branch.
Agreed.
Actually there was so less comments (most of them positive) that I
didn't think about a branch.
> The current half-finished changes have made it difficult fo
>>> However, we could easily convert to JSON for the published version of the
>>> file.
>>
>> Transformation to both formats are possible of course
>>
> It's really a question of which format is easiest to maintain.
XML of course.
> Although JSON is simpler, it does not allow comments AFAIK, whi
19 matches
Mail list logo
