>>> 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
>> 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
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
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 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 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 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 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 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
>>
>> - 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 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
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
---
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
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
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 8:49 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
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
+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 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
19 matches
Mail list logo
