continuum-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rinku <rahul.thakur.x...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Continuum White Site
Date Tue, 09 Aug 2005 20:15:52 GMT
On 8/10/05, Trygve Laugstøl <trygvis@apache.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 07:20:49PM +1200, Rinku wrote:
> > >>2) I like the way the 'generated artifacts' are hyperlinked on the
> > >>build details page - is it possible not to have the Reports inlined on
> > >>the same page but on different page (JUnit, site reports)
> > >
> > >I'm not sure about inlining the reports - they could be quite large
> > >(though I guess the same is true of the build output). If it is going to
> > >be a click away anyway, I'm not sure what the advantage is?
> >
> > - Yep, thats what I meant 'not' inlining the reports or build logs on the
> > same page as these can get too big for usability/navigability reasons. I
> > think it would be better to keep links to detailed logs/reports.
> >
> > >>
> > >>ohh...btw, Continuum logo is neat :-) !
> > >
> > >Yes, I think so too (we're lucky it wasn't me designing it :)
> > >
> > >- Brett
> > >
> > Is one one for M2 in design ;-) ?
> >
> > On another note, we could use Javascripting for doing stuff (hide/show
> > project groups, expand nodes...), but what about browsers with Javascript
> > disabled? or perhaps I am missing something and its been taken care of (in
> > which case we can skip this!)
> 
> Is there really *anyone* that doesn't have a JS enabled browser? I don't
> think requiring JS to be enabled for using Continuum is a big deal.
> 
> --
> Trygve
> 

Yes, we work for a few organisations where its an organisation wide
scenario - Javascript is disabled in browsers, and we are required to
cater to both cases - JS and non-JS ones  (in case of 'public facing'
websites)

Cheers,

Rahul

Mime
View raw message