Sorry for the confusion, I never ran sitegen.py myself because I thought that to be the
priviledge of the editors. As Gerwin has found out, I dropped these links manually in
376347e6131a because they all were broken after the update on sourceforge. I decided not
to update them for three reasons:
It looks like Andreas dropped these manually for his entries, so nothing really
went wrong with the tools, he was just reacting to the sourceforge update
leading to broken links.
The URL scheme for linking to revision IDs in the new sourceforge setup is
http://sourceforge.net/p/afp/code/ci/chan
I'll have a look at it. The links shouldn't be dropped, something is going
wrong there.
Cheers,
Gerwin
On 06/06/2013, at 1:48 PM, Christian Sternagel wrote:
> Btw: the links do not seem to work anyway. But why not replace them with
> working links instead of just dropping them?
>
> On 06/06/2
Btw: the links do not seem to work anyway. But why not replace them with
working links instead of just dropping them?
On 06/06/2013 12:40 PM, Christian Sternagel wrote:
Dear all,
to update the change history of one of my AFP entries, I ran
admin/sitegen. I noticed that as a result some other s
Dear all,
to update the change history of one of my AFP entries, I ran
admin/sitegen. I noticed that as a result some other sites changed too.
All the changes where along the lines of
-(revision href="http://afp.hg.sourceforge.net/hgweb/afp/afp/rev/f74a8be156a7";>f74a8be156a7)
+(revision f74
