Re: RC1 documentation issues

2017-03-28 Thread Munagala Ramanath
The javadoc for 3.7 is there now -- I triggered a build via IRC.

Commit triggering was not working for me for some reason, so it is set to
build nightly.

Ram

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:58 PM, Thomas Weise  wrote:

> The following two issues observed while preparing 3.7.0 RC1:
>
> User doc contains duplicate entries in left nav:
>
> http://apex.apache.org/docs/malhar-3.7/
>
> Javadoc wasn't created in expected location after updating the buildbot
> file:
>
> https://ci.apache.org/projects/apex-malhar/apex-
> malhar-javadoc-release-3.7/index.html
>
> Ram, can you have a look please?
>
> Thanks,
> Thomas
>



-- 

___

Munagala V. Ramanath

Software Engineer

E: r...@datatorrent.com | M: (408) 331-5034 | Twitter: @UnknownRam

www.datatorrent.com  |  apex.apache.org


Re: RC1 documentation issues

2017-03-28 Thread Munagala Ramanath
Fixed the duplicate entries issue:
https://github.com/apache/apex-malhar/pull/592

Looking at the other one.

Ram

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:58 PM, Thomas Weise  wrote:

> The following two issues observed while preparing 3.7.0 RC1:
>
> User doc contains duplicate entries in left nav:
>
> http://apex.apache.org/docs/malhar-3.7/
>
> Javadoc wasn't created in expected location after updating the buildbot
> file:
>
> https://ci.apache.org/projects/apex-malhar/apex-
> malhar-javadoc-release-3.7/index.html
>
> Ram, can you have a look please?
>
> Thanks,
> Thomas
>



-- 

___

Munagala V. Ramanath

Software Engineer

E: r...@datatorrent.com | M: (408) 331-5034 | Twitter: @UnknownRam

www.datatorrent.com  |  apex.apache.org


RC1 documentation issues

2017-03-28 Thread Thomas Weise
The following two issues observed while preparing 3.7.0 RC1:

User doc contains duplicate entries in left nav:

http://apex.apache.org/docs/malhar-3.7/

Javadoc wasn't created in expected location after updating the buildbot
file:

https://ci.apache.org/projects/apex-malhar/apex-malhar-javadoc-release-3.7/index.html

Ram, can you have a look please?

Thanks,
Thomas