> On April 21, 2015, 11:12 a.m., Raju Bairishetti wrote:
> > src/site/apt/releases/release-history.apt, line 26
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/33390/diff/1/?file=937503#file937503line26>
> >
> >     Can we have **2.1.0-incubating docs** instead of 2.1.x-incubating docs?

With link put as 2.1.x, we need not update again if we roll more candidates for 
the release. Though the version number and vesions directory needs change, if a 
new candidate is rolled - could not figure out a way to avoid this. Usually, we 
will be doing only one release from 2.1.x, unless there needs to be a patch 
release from 2.1 line, where the full version needs to be updated.


- Amareshwari


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/33390/#review80942
-----------------------------------------------------------


On April 21, 2015, 8:59 a.m., Amareshwari Sriramadasu wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/33390/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated April 21, 2015, 8:59 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for lens, Rajat Khandelwal and Srikanth Sundarrajan.
> 
> 
> Bugs: LENS-505
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LENS-505
> 
> 
> Repository: lens
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> - Updated download page
> - Updated release history table
> - Documented incompatible changes in release history page.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/site/apt/releases/download.apt b18b3e5 
>   src/site/apt/releases/release-history.apt 959ef82 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/33390/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Ran mvn site:run locally and verified doc is fine.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Amareshwari Sriramadasu
> 
>

Reply via email to