Two replies in one ... On 12/11/07, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 11/12/2007, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Dec 8, 2007 9:44 PM, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: <snip/> > > > > > > I'll cut RC2 mid next week (to allow for any other feedback between > > > now and then) that has the pom.xml in the source distros. Please feel > > > free to try out the pom and update it as you see fit within the next > > > 2-3 days (I haven't tried the m2 site for example, don't intend to > > > either for v0.7 etc.). > > > > +1 from me to include the pom.xml > > > > I just ran mvn site assembly:assembly (on trunk) and it all looked > > good except that the 0.7 release menu was missing from the site - so I > > just added it (copied from navigation.xml). > > <snap/>
Thanks for taking a look Niall, and for the site.xml update. > > The only issue I could see was the cobertura (http://tinyurl.com/2a9ctf) > > one:Al > > > > http://people.apache.org/~rahul/commons/scxml-0.7/rc1/site/cobertura/js/ > <snip/> Thanks for the reminder :-) > > I thought at first that the JS files were only present on the web-site, but > that is included in the binary distribution. > One way to get round the problem of releasing the JS files would be to > exclude cobertura from the release archive. > I would not have thought it was essential to have it in the archive, as it's > available on the website. > > Just a thought. > <snap/> Yup, that would be a nice solution, but that sort of thing can be more easily done with m2 (say, by introducing a dev / site profile). Given the current release plan (m1), I'll be removing the report altogether. -Rahul --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
