I just published the staged site, since the modification was done but not
pushed to production
I hope we'll soon change the site publish tooling and remove the staging
feature that is causing more issues than really helping us...
Regards,
Hervé
Le lundi 8 janvier 2018, 10:54:19 CET Apache
I hope you're aware that the jiraIssue.startsWith("M") check isn't good
enough...
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Maven+JIRA+issues+overview
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/BrowseProjects.jspa?selectedCategory=10510
thanks,
Robert
On Mon, 08 Jan 2018 11:03:30 +0100,
Did you read the comment directly above:
may end up commenting on other TLPs in some cases but should be very rare
There should be very few cases where a commit to our repo refers to another
TLP’s issues. The most common case will be INFRA
On Mon 8 Jan 2018 at 17:41, Robert Scholte
Just wondering why not simply excluding INFRA- marked messages?
On Mon, 08 Jan 2018 20:07:24 +0100, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
Did you read the comment directly above:
may end up commenting on other TLPs in some cases but should be very rare
There should be
+1 :)
Le lundi 8 janvier 2018, 20:33:12 CET Robert Scholte a écrit :
> Just wondering why not simply excluding INFRA- marked messages?
>
> On Mon, 08 Jan 2018 20:07:24 +0100, Stephen Connolly
>
> wrote:
> > Did you read the comment directly above:
> >
> > may
thank you Plamen: useful answer, as usual
I like both GitWeb and GitHub displays: both are useful, but for different
purpose
I tried to integrate both [1], with GitWeb as "diff" and GitHub as "commits".
But the GitHub comparison does not work well: then I put it only on HEAD.
I don't know if