geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com>
Subject Re: web site update
Date Wed, 02 May 2007 14:13:21 GMT
On May 2, 2007, at 7:01 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote:
> Jason Dillon wrote:
>> Um... why?
>> That mens for each release we have a duplicate image?  That is crazy
> not really, wasn't your point to have a unique image for each  
> release page? maybe I didn't understand

No, I want to have one box image in http://geronimo.apache.org/ 
images/ per version, and have each release page reference it (like a  
normal web page would do).


>> man.  Thats like saying that each page has the banner image  
>> attached to it, though admittedly that is much worse, but its  
>> along the same lines as what you are suggesting.
>
> right, there is no point in copying the very same image over and  
> over again, so there is clearly a misunderstanding here.

Um... I'm confused... you said:

<snip>
I think we should be consistent in the way we manage the attachments  
with confluence.
I rather have them attached to corresponding release page.
There are not that many to copy over anyway.
</snip>

I read this as you want to have the images of the box log attached to  
the corresponding release page, meaning each page has a separate copy  
of the same logo.  I'm not sure how I could have read it any  
differently :-(


> If we are going to use just one image (independent of the Geronimo  
> version) on each release page then we definitively point to the  
> same spot where we have the banners and logos on the repo.
> However, if we want to have for each release page a new Geronimo  
> box with a matching version number, then we should to attach each  
> of those images to the corresponding release page. This is the  
> approach I thought we were talking about. If we go this way then we  
> need to come up with a kind of standard way to create that image,  
> today we are missing 1.0 and 1.1.1.

Right, I don't think we need to have an image that matches the exact  
version.  I think that 1.1, 1.1.1, 1.1.2, etc... all use the 1.1  
logo, 2.0, 2.0.1, 2.0.2, etc. all use the 2.0 logo, and so on.

Ask Hiram to whip up a 1.0 version, he said it was relatively easy.

I don't think we want to have separate images for 2.0-m5, 2.0-m6, 2.0- 
m99, 2.0.1, etc, basically one image per major branch... else we'd be  
asking Hiram to make new images all of the time ;-)

--jason


Mime
View raw message