Re: New publication workflow: Echidna 1.2.0, Specberus 1.1.0

Hi, it's my understanding that the autopublishing system does not currently
support note track documents. If so is it possible to make it support them?

--

Regards

SteveF
Current Standards Work @W3C
<http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/>

On 12 April 2015 at 17:23, Antonio Olmo Titos <antonio@w3.org> wrote:

>
> Hello, there.
>
> We just deployed updated versions of the software in labs.w3.org:
>
>     • Echidna 1.2.0 — changelog:
> https://github.com/w3c/echidna/compare/v1.1.1...v1.2.0
>     • Specberus 1.1.0 — changelog:
> https://github.com/w3c/specberus/compare/v1.0.3...v1.1.0
>
> The main reason for this release were a couple of important bugfixes:
>
>     • Docs in which, by mistake, the URL of "this" version was equal to
> the URL of the "previous" version slipped through the system, causing
> inconsistencies — https://github.com/w3c/specberus/issues/29
>     • Binary files weren't downloaded properly, so images weren't shown OK
> in published docs — https://github.com/w3c/echidna/issues/137
>
> But there were other changes in the last days: corrections in
> documentation (README); tweaks in the way the API returns info about
> publication jobs [ https://github.com/w3c/echidna/issues/126 ]; from now
> on, when attempts to publish fail, the versions of the software will be
> shown in the e-mail that is sent [
> https://github.com/w3c/echidna/issues/120 ]; both HTTP and HTTPS are now
> allowed when publishing, regardless of what protocol was specified when the
> token was registered; home-brewed "insafe" [ https://github.com/w3c/insafe
> ] replaced "safe-url-input-checker"...
>
> Happy publishing :)
>
> --
> Antonio Olmo Titos
>   web developer, W3C
>   antonio@w3.org
>   http://w3.org/People/Antonio
>   +81 335162504
>
>