Go, go go. Jarmo
On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 6:31 AM, Alister Scott <[email protected]> wrote: > Agree, all good. > > > On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 12:27 PM, Bret Pettichord <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> Looks good to me. >> >> On Saturday, October 2, 2010, Charley Baker <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Done. I cherrypicked the README change from master, updated VERSION >> > and CHANGES. Releasing final 1.6.6 in a few if anyone can double check >> > we're good to go. :) >> > >> > >> > Charley Baker >> > Lead Developer, Watir, http://watir.com >> > >> > >> > >> > On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Bret Pettichord <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> >> It's a beautiful day out today, so I'm going to take care of some yard >> >> work >> >> and assemble my new grill. >> >> >> >> I'll merge it after that. Or you can do it now. >> >> >> >> Bret >> >> >> >> On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Charley Baker >> >> <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Once you make these changes to the release branch and update CHANGES, >> >>> I vote we release 1.6.6 final and start working on 1.6.7. All in >> >>> favor? Let me know if you want me to merge it. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Charley Baker >> >>> Lead Developer, Watir, http://watir.com >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> 2010/10/1 Bret Pettichord <[email protected]>: >> >>> > I've updated master so that all the gems now use the one readme. >> >>> > >> >>> > I will also make these changes to the 1.6.6 release branch. >> >>> > >> >>> > Bret >> >>> > >> >>> > On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 1:59 PM, marekj <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >> >> >>> >> On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 1:41 PM, Jarmo <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >> > That's just not true. It might be the case at the moment, but i >> >>> >> > have >> >>> >> > a >> >>> >> > plan to fix that. In my mind there should be still 1 README on >> >>> >> > github >> >>> >> > and when gems are being made then that same README should be >> >>> >> > copied >> >>> >> > into 3 gems. So every gem would have the same README. I don't see >> >>> >> > much >> >>> >> > of a point of having different readme-s >> >>> >> >> >>> >> Thanks Jarmo, now I know what you mean to have one README as a >> >>> >> template. I had not thought of that. >> >>> >> >> >>> >> > though since the API should be >> >>> >> > same anyway (i know it currently isn't 100%, but that shouldn't >> >>> >> > be in >> >>> >> > the readme anyway). >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > As you can see then currently on the github isn't any VERSION or >> >>> >> > CHANGES in commonwatir, watir or firewatir directory, but they're >> >>> >> > still there when you install gems. Same plan goes to README. >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > Jarmo >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 7:33 PM, marekj <[email protected]> >> >>> >> > wrote: >> >>> >> >> I wanted to explain and defend my view of why there are 4 >> >>> >> >> README.rdoc >> >>> >> >> files in watir project. >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> Watir project on github has a README.rdoc file as a landing page >> >>> >> >> which >> >>> >> >> is used to present the project and its 3 separate gems. >> >>> >> >> Each library firewatir, watir, commonwatir has a README.rdoc >> >>> >> >> specific >> >>> >> >> to that library so each gem then has it's own readme. >> >>> >> >> The main top level readme never makes it to the user's machine >> >>> >> >> when >> >>> >> >> they install the gems. >> >>> >> >> If the user runs rdoc generation from the gems on their own >> >>> >> >> machine >> >>> >> >> they now have a local README for each one of the gems. >> >>> >> >> The toplevel gem is visible on github as a landing page for the >> >>> >> >> project. >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> And that is why I thought there should be 4 README.rdoc files >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> marekj >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> http://rubytester.com >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 11:02 AM, marekj < <http://marekj.com> >> >> -- >> Bret Pettichord >> Lead Developer, Watir, www.watir.com >> >> Blog, www.io.com/~wazmo/blog >> Twitter, www.twitter.com/bpettichord >> _______________________________________________ >> Wtr-development mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-development > > > _______________________________________________ > Wtr-development mailing list > [email protected] > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-development > _______________________________________________ Wtr-development mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-development
