View Issue Details
ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0019270 | mantisbt | documentation | public | 2015-01-26 14:33 | 2016-08-15 09:02 |
Reporter | atrol | Assigned To | vboctor | ||
Priority | normal | Severity | minor | Reproducibility | always |
Status | closed | Resolution | fixed | ||
Product Version | 1.2.19 | ||||
Target Version | 1.2.20 | Fixed in Version | 1.2.20 | ||
Summary | 0019270: Missing documentation from 1.2.19 download | ||||
Description | Official download of 1.2.19 [1] does no longer contain directory doc/en with administrators and developers guide. [1] https://sourceforge.net/projects/mantisbt/files/mantis-stable/1.2.19/ | ||||
Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
Something must have gone wrong in the packaging script. Will check. |
|
I must have forgotten to specify the '-d' flag to generate packages. Anyway I reran the script and confirmed the documentation is included. Waiting for vboctor to upload to Sourceforge. |
|
Not sure if it's a good idea to have two different versions of 1.2.19. |
|
It's not a "different" version, it's the same plus the docs -- that nobody reads anyway ;-) |
|
My concern is that there are two versions of mantisbt-1.2.19.zip with different MD5/SHA1 sums. Ok, nobody checks the sums ;-) |
|
Sorry, just realized I resolved this by mistake. |
|
I would just skip this for 1.2.19, just let's make sure it happens by default for future versions of 1.2. and 1.3.. The docs are the same as 1.2.18 and if user overwrites (as they would typically do for minor version upgrades), then they will have the docs. I understand that new users won't have it, but it is on our website. |
|
In that case, maybe a README file (and a blog post ?) pointing users to download the docs from http://mantisbt.org/documentation.php would be useful.
You mean changing the release build script ? |
|
Resolving as won't fix based on vboctor's comment. |
|
|
|
Correct. |
|
Reminder sent to: dregad Why did you close? |
|
I closed it because the doc was missing due to a human error (I forgot to specify a flag when packaging the archives), not a bug in the release script. Since Victor said he would not fix the 1.2.19, I didn't see the point in keeping this opened (it was in resolved status since February) This is independent from 1.2.20 release. |
|
As an end user I read at the moment: I prefer to resolve this issue at the moment, set "Fixed in Version" and close the issue after there is a version 1.2.20. |
|
As you wish. |
|