The Apache Jenkins build system has built Camel.trunk.notest (build #1913)
Status: Still Failing
Check console output at https://builds.apache.org/job/Camel.trunk.notest/1913/
to view the results.
Hi Christian,
Next week I'll be in vacation, but I can do the 2.11.1 after I come
back. It should be ok, I assume the 22 issues will not be all resolved
next week.
Cheers,
Hadrian
On 06/27/2013 05:02 PM, Christian Müller wrote:
We agreed to not build the PDF manual starting with Camel 2.12
We agreed to not build the PDF manual starting with Camel 2.12.0. We still
have to discuss whether the HTML manual should still created or not.
However, because we only publish the HTML/PDF manual for major/minor
releases, it's not important for Camel 2.11.1.
We have 22 unresolved issues assigned
Hi,
FYI. My publication about Apache Camel is out since today. Interested, you
can read it in JaxCenter Magazine (June) - tinyurl.com/ky4nmfr and tweet,
blog, forward it ;-)
Regards,
--
Charles Moulliard
Apache Committer / Architect @RedHat
Twitter : @cmoulliard | Blog : http://cmoulliard.blogs
Hey guys,
Can't you use scalate for manual generation? We use it in Karaf and it does a
job. :) It's little forgotten by owners but still usable!
Listings are made by princexml or something like this.
Cheers,
Lukasz
Wiadomość napisana przez Hadrian Zbarcea w dniu 27 cze
2013, o godz. 19:16:
Give the fact that it uses precious compile time, I would drop the html
manual too. It's not as well formated as the PDF one and equally useless.
Just my $0.02,
Hadrian
On 06/27/2013 12:30 PM, Christian Müller wrote:
+1 for #5 but would like to keep html manual.
Best,
Christian
Sent from a m
+1 for #5 but would like to keep html manual.
Best,
Christian
Sent from a mobile device
Am 26.06.2013 17:38 schrieb "Daniel Kulp" :
>
> With the latest confluence (and also once they actually update to 5.1.x),
> the Camel manual is no longer producible. The main problem is the
> javascript tha
+1 #5 but would like to keep html manual.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Claus Ibsen wrote:
> I vote for #5
>
> It will just keep haunting us in the future. With new problems etc.
>
> Its 2013 and people read online docs / google / stackoverflow / watch
> videos / etc.
> The camel pdf manual
+1 for the 5.
I don't think there are lots of people are using the pdf to lookup the document
of camel.
--
Willem Jiang
Red Hat, Inc.
FuseSource is now part of Red Hat
Web: http://www.fusesource.com | http://www.redhat.com
Blog: http://willemjiang.blogspot.com (http://willemjiang.blogspot.c
#5 +1 agree
Hadrian
On 06/27/2013 10:07 AM, Claus Ibsen wrote:
I vote for #5
It will just keep haunting us in the future. With new problems etc.
Its 2013 and people read online docs / google / stackoverflow / watch
videos / etc.
The camel pdf manual is not a good manual but just a big dump of
I vote for #5
It will just keep haunting us in the future. With new problems etc.
Its 2013 and people read online docs / google / stackoverflow / watch
videos / etc.
The camel pdf manual is not a good manual but just a big dump of the
web site, thats not readable, and I dont see any people use it
On Jun 27, 2013, at 6:04 AM, Claus Ibsen wrote:
> Hi
>
> We recently released the 2.10.5 release after our git migration.
> It would be great if we could start working on a 2.11.1 release as well.
I certainly support the idea of a 2.11.1 release, but we *DO* need to figure
out what we want to
Hi
We recently released the 2.10.5 release after our git migration.
It would be great if we could start working on a 2.11.1 release as well.
--
Claus Ibsen
-
www.camelone.org: The open source integration conference.
Red Hat, Inc.
FuseSource is now part of Red Hat
Email: cib...@
13 matches
Mail list logo
