| ID |
Date |
Icon |
Author |
Author Email |
Category |
OS |
ELOG Version |
Subject |
|
1706
|
Tue Feb 21 22:13:40 2006 |
 | Steve Jones | steve.jones@freescale.com | Question | All | 2.6.1 | Re: svn revision number in the source |
| Steve Jones wrote: |
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
| Steve Jones wrote: | | So, when we go to the download section and download directly from there, that is not "committed" source? I ask because the revision id there is not set to anything that I can see. |
Can you be a bit more specific? What do you download? The Windows binaries, the Linux RPM? Or from the Subversion repository? The current version in the repository, which you can download here, contains in the file elogd.c following line 8:
$Id: elogd.c 1660 2006-02-17 19:48:12Z ritt $
This tells you that this is revision 1660, committed on Feb. 17 by myself. So what is the problem? |
| Steve Jones wrote: | Ok, this is really strange but just an hour ago I clicked on the http://midas.psi.ch/elog/download.html link and I was taken to a completely different webview - in fact, I am quite sure that at the bottom right corner it said "WebCVS"! Now, it says WebSVN and the revision info is in there. I've been trying to debug a problem with default.css and the elcode icons - and somewhere in there I cleared my firefox cache. Perhaps an old page was cached????
I have no idea how I got to CVS, and it make sense that CVS was not setting the SVN revision code.
Sorry to bother you on this. |
I just downloaded the tarball from SVN and the revision numbers are set correctly, as you said. I'm stumped as to how I got to CVS. I am running into issues that are related to the stylesheet properties, but that is for a different entry.
Thanks! |
|
|
1707
|
Tue Feb 21 22:33:32 2006 |
| Stefan Ritt | stefan.ritt@psi.ch | Question | All | 2.6.1 | Re: svn revision number in the source |
| Steve Jones wrote: | | I have no idea how I got to CVS |
I realized that I had an old link to CVS when I checked your previous posting, so I updated that link like 30 min ago. That's why you got a new one. |
|
1708
|
Tue Feb 21 22:37:14 2006 |
 | Steve Jones | steve.jones@freescale.com | Question | All | 2.6.1 | Re: svn revision number in the source |
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
| Steve Jones wrote: | | I have no idea how I got to CVS |
I realized that I had an old link to CVS when I checked your previous posting, so I updated that link like 30 min ago. That's why you got a new one. |
Ah, thanks. All is now right with the world  |
|
2060
|
Thu Nov 9 22:40:06 2006 |
| Stefan Ritt | stefan.ritt@psi.ch | Request | Linux | 2.6.1 | Re: suggestion for "new user registration" page |
| Mark Bergman wrote: | Suggestions for improving the registration page:
Put a "submit" button after the password entry.
Possibly supress the local "bottom text", or allow the specification of a different file for the registration page.
After the user has registered, then show a page allowing them to subscribe for e-mail notifcation. That page should be organized the same way as the main page, with groups. Users should be allowed to subscribe to entire groups, or to expand each group to select or unsubscribe from individual logbooks.
Thanks,
Mark |
I put the "save" button below the password entry and removed the "bottom text", I hope this helps a bit. |
|
2170
|
Mon Mar 19 19:51:26 2007 |
| Stefan Ritt | stefan.ritt@psi.ch | Question | Linux | Windows | 6.4-1802 | Re: submit modified elog entry |
| deletoille wrote: | hello, I have small a bug,
when I create an entry. Per moment the program requires of me: "Submit modified Elog entry"
if I answer yes, Eog create 2 entry identical.
If I answer not it create only one.
I don't wait that elog asks me a confirmation
|
Are you sure about that? Can you reproduce it? I tried to reproduce it with the simple example logbook from the distribution, by adding the Use lock = 1 option to the configuration, but without success. I got only a single entry or no entry. You can of course remove the Use lock option, if you don't need locking. |
|
67971
|
Tue Jun 9 12:51:07 2015 |
| Stefan Ritt | stefan.ritt@psi.ch | Question | Linux | V3.1.0-241 | Re: subject line bug on resumit elog entries as new? |
I fixed both issues, now resubmitting an entry or submitting a new entry both yields "New LEOG entry".
| Jacky Li wrote: |
|
Hi,
I updated an old elog entry and resubmit it as new by checking the box resubmit as new. Does the subject line should said it is a "New ELOG entry" instead of "Updated ELOG entry"? Thank you.
Also when some people submit a new elog, the subject line is "Updated ELOG entry". This is a bit odd. I can't reproduce that bug when I did my test.
Jacky
|
|
|
67978
|
Tue Jun 9 16:17:06 2015 |
| David Pilgram | David.Pilgram@epost.org.uk | Question | Linux | V3.1.1-2c4f838 | Re: subject line bug on resumit elog entries as new? |
Hi Stefan,
I see that you've updated the elog running this forum today, 5 versions after you reported fixing the "A new elog entry has been entered" and "An old elog entry has been updated" issue. But the emails coming out are still all of the "An old elog entry...", rather than "A new..."
David.
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
|
I fixed both issues, now resubmitting an entry or submitting a new entry both yields "New LEOG entry".
| Jacky Li wrote: |
|
Hi,
I updated an old elog entry and resubmit it as new by checking the box resubmit as new. Does the subject line should said it is a "New ELOG entry" instead of "Updated ELOG entry"? Thank you.
Also when some people submit a new elog, the subject line is "Updated ELOG entry". This is a bit odd. I can't reproduce that bug when I did my test.
Jacky
|
|
|
|
67979
|
Tue Jun 9 16:46:48 2015 |
| Stefan Ritt | stefan.ritt@psi.ch | Question | Linux | V3.1.1-2c4f838 | Re: subject line bug on resumit elog entries as new? |
Any better now?
| David Pilgram wrote: |
|
Hi Stefan,
I see that you've updated the elog running this forum today, 5 versions after you reported fixing the "A new elog entry has been entered" and "An old elog entry has been updated" issue. But the emails coming out are still all of the "An old elog entry...", rather than "A new..."
|
|