bloodhound-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Martin <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Bloodhound 0.2 (incubating)
Date Tue, 13 Nov 2012 09:57:22 GMT
Thanks for that Joe. I closed #255 on the basis of that work and I have 
raised another that can be used to complete any work for our copy of 
Trac that turns out to be required:

Obviously if we determine here that there is nothing to do then #256 
should be closed with a link to the relevant decisions. I have set it as 
a blocker for release 3 as we need to get this sorted quickly.


On 12/11/12 18:32, Joachim Dreimann wrote:
> Gary has raised ticket #255 to remove all minified files before the next
> release:
> With my last commit (r1408385) we have now removed all .min. files from
> bloodhound code and our docs.
> The only remaining minified files in our repository are now part of the
> Trac code.
> - Joe
> On 12 November 2012 17:38, Gary Martin <> wrote:
>> On 12/11/12 13:19, Branko ─îibej wrote:
>>> On 12.11.2012 13:25, Gary Martin wrote:
>>>> OK, when I looked closer at the Trac files it seems that they do
>>>> minify some of it after all. Are we happy to maintain this as another
>>>> difference between our copy of Trac and upstream?
>>> The important question is, are the files minified in the Trac
>>> repository, or in their release tarballs? If it's in the repo, well
>>> then, my interpretation is that you're just shipping Trac with a few
>>> patches (and I expect those patches aren't in the minified code). If
>>> it's just in the release tarballs, then I expect the upstream import
>>> went awry and needs to be fixed.
>>> -- Brane
>> It would appear that there is minified code direct in the Trac
>> repositories. See**browser/trunk/trac/htdocs/js/
>> **jquery.js<>for
>> I suspect we will need a few more opinions from IPMC members to be sure
>> that this argument is enough to make the problem go away. I don't
>> particularly want to have to maintain more differences from upstream but I
>> prefer to get the correct approach in place here.
>> Cheers,
>>      Gary

View raw message