On Tue, 2005-06-07 at 18:46 +1200, Simon Kitching wrote: > On Mon, 2005-06-06 at 22:35 +0100, robert burrell donkin wrote: > > The first public release candidate (RC3) for Betwixt 0.6.1 is now > > available for download: > > http://people.apache.org/~rdonkin/commons-betwixt/. Please check and > > report any problems ASAP. > > > > Hi Robert, > > Here's some stuff re the site. > > Many of these items are just minor typos, but I figured I may as well > pass on stuff once I'd spotted it. I don't mean to imply that all of > this needs fixing for 1.6.1!
well spotted 8-) might as well get them fixed for the release... <snip> > === > The SVN link only goes to the viewcvs link. I suggest also having a link > to the "raw" URL for subversion. This is much more helpful for locating > the string a user needs to pass to the subversion client app to do a > checkout. makes sense. added. <snip> > Navbar: > Menu item "Outputing The Results" --> "Outputting The Results"? > Entry "Reading Beans(Advanced)" appears to be in bold for some reason (for me, at least) the entry is only bold when the page (in question) is being viewed. > === > Dependencies: > The bottom of the "tasks" page has > * Upgraded commons-beanutils to 1.6.1. > * Upgraded commons-digester to 1.5. > but the official Maven dependencies are beanutils-1.7 and digester-1.6 > respectively. i think that these updates were done for the last release but i've added notes for this release (to avoid any confusion). > === > Maven reports: > > I would suggest disabling this report. Firstly, a log of the last 30 > days isn't of much use. And secondly, due to the import into SVN of > back-dated CVS changes, date-based selection on the apache subversion > repository is broken, so the report is not just useless but actively > WRONG. > > I suggest that "Developer Activity" and "File Activity" reports are also > useless, and (if based on SVN date selection) also wrong. AIUI the problem occurs only with the dates on the imported data. new data is fine. i've checked the results and they look about right. i do agree that they aren't all that useful but i know some users like them so i'm inclined to keep them... > There are 28 warnings in the javadoc warnings report. i think you mean that there are a number of warnings about packages in the javadoc report. this is caused by break iterator warnings (which are 1.4.x only). happily, these were caused by a single sentence which contained a typo. fixing that made them go away. - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
