Files as 1389 and 1390, with some additional comments about the
alwaysSend bit.
On 11/08/2007, at 2:59 AM, Emmanuel Venisse wrote:
Yes they are improvments requests to file. I'm not sure about 2)
because we already have the alwaysSend parameter that can be set
I won't look at it for
Thanks.
Emmanuel
Brett Porter a écrit :
Files as 1389 and 1390, with some additional comments about the
alwaysSend bit.
On 11/08/2007, at 2:59 AM, Emmanuel Venisse wrote:
Yes they are improvments requests to file. I'm not sure about 2)
because we already have the alwaysSend parameter that
Did I understand the summary to be the following to improvement
requests to file?
1) for group notifiers, don't send a mail if another build is
scheduled in the group already (instead, have the results added to
the mail for that group). Make this a configurable option, on the
group
Brett Porter a écrit :
On 02/08/2007, at 7:46 AM, Emmanuel Venisse wrote:
For a project notifier, I think we can keep what we have actually, but
for a group notifier, we can send a single mail by project group.
The mail can be sent after the build of the latest project of the
group, I don't
For a project notifier, I think we can keep what we have actually, but for a
group notifier, we can send a single mail by project group.
The mail can be sent after the build of the latest project of the group, I don't think it will be a problem to know if the project is the latest and we won't
On 02/08/2007, at 7:46 AM, Emmanuel Venisse wrote:
For a project notifier, I think we can keep what we have actually,
but for a group notifier, we can send a single mail by project group.
The mail can be sent after the build of the latest project of the
group, I don't think it will be a
well, 1.1 is in beta now so ideally no more features, but maybe we just call
this a bug fix for now..
I guess the first suggestion might be a batch email option with a summary
presented at the top of the mail...that would almost have to be on a per
notifier though, but that is made easier by the
On 01/08/2007, at 12:01 PM, Jesse McConnell wrote:
well, 1.1 is in beta now so ideally no more features, but maybe we
just call
this a bug fix for now..
yeah, I'm looking more for a small improvement than a revolution.
Avoiding schema changes and such. I really should have said something
