You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to commits@daffodil.apache.org by GitBox <gi...@apache.org> on 2022/03/24 22:18:51 UTC
[GitHub] [daffodil-site] Shanedell opened a new pull request #85: Update some items specified in the closed PR
Shanedell opened a new pull request #85:
URL: https://github.com/apache/daffodil-site/pull/85
@tuxji @stevedlawrence This PR is to help close out issue mentioned here --> https://github.com/apache/daffodil-site/pull/84
Steve I did not link some of the GitHub issues to specific features as some items were implemented before the move to the Apache repository. So those issue do not show up in the list as they weren't created. But I also update closed issue link to point to only closed issues tagged to milestone 1.0.0. Technically that should be all issues but some weren't tagged under the milestone.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@daffodil.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [daffodil-site] stevedlawrence edited a comment on pull request #85: Update some items specified in the closed PR
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
stevedlawrence edited a comment on pull request #85:
URL: https://github.com/apache/daffodil-site/pull/85#issuecomment-1078447012
> Steve I did not link some of the GitHub issues to specific features as some items were implemented before the move to the Apache repository
Since this is the first Apache release, I think it's fine to mention all features even if there isn't a issue directly associated with it. Moving forward, all features will have an associated bug so shouldn't be an issue.
> Technically that should be all issues but some weren't tagged under the milestone.
Similar to what we do with Daffodil, where every issue is associated with the "Fix Version" that the bug was fixed in, does it make sense to associate every closed VS Code issue with the milestone it was fixed in? This way if someone is curious about a bug they can easily see if was fixed or not (based on closed vs open), and if it is closed then what release/milestone it was fixed in? So should we assign all current closed bugs to the 1.0.0 milestone?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@daffodil.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [daffodil-site] Shanedell merged pull request #85: Update some items specified in the closed PR
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
Shanedell merged pull request #85:
URL: https://github.com/apache/daffodil-site/pull/85
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@daffodil.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [daffodil-site] stevedlawrence commented on pull request #85: Update some items specified in the closed PR
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
stevedlawrence commented on pull request #85:
URL: https://github.com/apache/daffodil-site/pull/85#issuecomment-1078447012
> Steve I did not link some of the GitHub issues to specific features as some items were implemented before the move to the Apache repository
Since this is the first Apache release, I think it's fine to mention all features even if there isn't a issue directly associated with it. Moving forward, all features will have an associated bug so shouldn't be an issue.
> Technically that should be all issues but some weren't tagged under the milestone.
Similar to what we do with Daffodil, where every issue is associated with the "Fix Version" that the bug was fixed in, does it make sense to associate every closed VS Code issue with the milestone it was fixed in? This way if someone is curious about a bug they can easily see if was fixed or not (based on closed vs open), and if it it closed what release/milestone it was fixed in? So should we assign all current closed bugs to the 1.0.0 milestone?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@daffodil.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [daffodil-site] stevedlawrence commented on a change in pull request #85: Update some items specified in the closed PR
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
stevedlawrence commented on a change in pull request #85:
URL: https://github.com/apache/daffodil-site/pull/85#discussion_r834782525
##########
File path: site/_layouts/vscode.html
##########
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
{% unless page.released %}
<div class="alert alert-warning">
- Apache Daffodil VSCode {{ page.title }} has not yet been released! The artifacts
+ Apache Daffodil VS Code {{ page.title }} has not yet been released! The artifacts
Review comment:
`page.title` now includes `VS Code Extension`, so this `VS Code` part can be removed.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@daffodil.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org