Perhaps a bad description of what I meant. To clarify, I didn't see any
powered by logo when I was browsing the console. A point that was on the
check list and was raised by a community member. When I've seen these
types of "powered by" logos before, they've been included in a page footer
along
I'm confused. Did Martyn say that a "Powered By" needs to be on the main
page of the console?
Justin
On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Michael André Pearce <
michael.andre.pea...@me.com> wrote:
> As Dan says there is a reference to being powered by in the about page.
>
> I was under the impress
As Dan says there is a reference to being powered by in the about page.
I was under the impression it shouldn't be up front an centre, but in the about
area would suffice.
Sent from my iPhone
> On 27 Jul 2017, at 13:11, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Jul 27, 2017, at 6:56 AM, Martyn Tayl
> On Jul 27, 2017, at 6:56 AM, Martyn Taylor wrote:
>
> No third party / propriety other products should be mentioned apart from a
> powered by.
> * I don't see any powered by on the main screens. We can open a JIRA to
> track it once this is merged.
It shouldn’t be on the main screen…. The
I've taken some time to review the console. I don't think we're quite
there yet in terms of meeting all of the goals outlined in the original
email. However, I don't think we need to hold up merging the PR.
Improvements can be made iteratively. Couple of comments:
Must be ActiveMQ Branded
*
I just reviewed the new console via the PR. I really like it. Nice work!
Justin
On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 2:30 PM, Clebert Suconic
wrote:
> That's fair guys.. I was just tempted to do it.. but won't to it.
>
> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Michael André Pearce
> wrote:
> > I would agree, w
That's fair guys.. I was just tempted to do it.. but won't to it.
On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Michael André Pearce
wrote:
> I would agree, we should stick to the plan.
>
> Merging straight after release and releasing again won't delay in reality the
> time people can use it. Apart from a fe
I would agree, we should stick to the plan.
Merging straight after release and releasing again won't delay in reality the
time people can use it. Apart from a few days at most.
But will address/de risks any concerns.
Sent from my iPhone
> On 13 Jul 2017, at 17:23, Timothy Bish wrote:
>
On 07/13/2017 12:10 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I am tempted to merge it now actually
Anyone opposed to this? it would be cool to have a console on this
next release.. if it's all good.
Please stick to the original plan. I guessing there's other folks like
myself who haven't had time to e
I am tempted to merge it now actually
Anyone opposed to this? it would be cool to have a console on this
next release.. if it's all good.
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Michael André Pearce
wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I would like to start a fresh discussion to keep things cleaner, and to
> prov
I will wait others to chime in, but Michael have done a very nice job
here.. I think this is pretty much ready to be merged...
I will wait the release that I'm doing this week (should be done
already.. fixing a few last issues as usual)... but other than that..
I think this has addressed all the i
Hi All,
I would like to start a fresh discussion to keep things cleaner, and to provide
more of a notification/update. (also to better name the subject)
The requirement for such a tool comes from many end users (including myself)
which keep requesting such a feature of a web management console
12 matches
Mail list logo
