On 9/6/06, Jörg Schaible <joerg.schaible@gmx.de> wrote:
<snip/>
>
> Site:
>
> - site/index.html: the menu has as second item a reference to javadoc-1.0,
> which should be now 1.1 (and is a dead-link anyway)
> - site/index.html: the link in the menu to the examples should better point
> to the viewcvs.cgi version (see links on site/cvs-usage.html
> for "subversion viewer")
> - site/index.html: "Releases" section references 1.0 only
> - site/index.html: typo "compatibile"
> - site/releases.html: references 1.0 only
> - site/downloads.html: references 1.0 only (you might have to add the
> version to versions section of the project.xml)
> - site/javadoc.html: The output shows two invalid javadoc links
>
<snap/>
Thanks for the detailed feedback, I had planned to update the 1.1
release bits on the site as part of cutting the release. As a
procedural question, I wasn't sure whether a site should talk about
the next release before that vote has actually passed.
I've corrected the typo and changed examples to the viewcvs link. Thanks!
> Files:
> - the *.tar.gz files show following message unpacking it: "tar: A lone zero
> block at xxxx" (Linux)
>
<snip/>
Seems this ant issue has the details:
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28776
Did that cause any other problems in the actual untarring?
-Rahul
> Bascially I am +1 to a release, but the site docs should at least be
> up-to-date for 1.1 at the relevant places.
>
> - Jörg
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
|