Hmm, I didn't mean to say that part. I was more musing on where such references should go.
Olemis Lang <[email protected]> wrote: >I think that we should point at it ... any reason against that ? > >On 8/30/12, Apache Bloodhound <[email protected]> >wrote: >> #153: Updates for next release >> ------------------------+----------------------- >> Reporter: gjm | Owner: gjm >> Type: task | Status: new >> Priority: critical | Milestone: Release 2 >> Component: installer | Version: >> Resolution: | Keywords: >> ------------------------+----------------------- >> >> Comment (by gjm): >> >> Issues remaining: >> * ensure that doc/wireframes is not in a future release >> * doc/wireframes are expected to be removed at some point >> * doc/html-templates are a similar candidate for removal. >> * this requires documentation and (optionally) a distribution >script to >> remove any unneeded directories, or possibly tweaking our repo >structure >> * use a top-level README to point to the installer/README.rst >> * indicate the revision/release of Trac incorporated >> * #157 adds a TRAC_VERSION file - should we point at this or >specify it >> elsewhere? >> >> -- >> Ticket URL: ><https://issues.apache.org/bloodhound/ticket/153#comment:8> >> Apache Bloodhound <https://issues.apache.org/bloodhound/> >> The Apache Bloodhound (incubating) issue tracker >> > > >-- >Regards, > >Olemis. > >Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/ >Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/ > >Featured article:
