On Wed, 2010-03-10 at 17:06 +0000, Gavin Panella wrote: > Review: Approve code > Hi, > > The "Disable edge redirect" message is only shown when is_edge is true > *and* site_message is set. The cover letter didn't mention that, but I > assume that's fine. Indeed, I forgot to mention that. Thanks for the review! > > I have a few comments, but nothing terrible :) > > > === modified file 'lib/canonical/launchpad/templates/launchpad-requestexpired.pt' > > --- lib/canonical/launchpad/templates/launchpad-requestexpired.pt 2009-07-28 17:19:42 +0000 > > +++ lib/canonical/launchpad/templates/launchpad-requestexpired.pt 2010-03-10 16:32:41 +0000 > > @@ -9,27 +9,16 @@ > >
> >Our edge server has a lower timeout threshold than launchpad.net, > > - so we can catch those before they hit a wider audience. > > - As a member of the Launchpad Beta Testers team, you're more > > - likely to experience them. If this is blocking your work, you > > - can disable redirection.
> > - > > +Our edge server has a lower timeout threshold than launchpad.net, > > + so we can catch those before they hit a wider audience. > > + As a member of the Launchpad Beta Testers team, you're more > > You haven't changed it, but this isn't strictly true - that the viewer > is a beta tester - any more is it? Doesn't matter much though. You're right. How about this:
Our edge server has a lower timeout threshold than launchpad.net, so we can catch those before they hit a wider audience. If this is blocking your work, you can disable automatic redirection to edge in order to use launchpad.net.
? > > > + likely to experience them. If this is blocking your work, you > > + can disable redirection. > > + > >> > Sorry, something just went wrong in Launchpad. > >
> > > > === modified file 'lib/canonical/launchpad/templates/oops.pt' > > --- lib/canonical/launchpad/templates/oops.pt 2010-01-13 17:58:30 +0000 > > +++ lib/canonical/launchpad/templates/oops.pt 2010-03-10 16:32:41 +0000 > > @@ -9,6 +9,9 @@ > > > > + > > + > > Do you mean to hard-code the "rev5" there? Unfortunately, yes. This template doesn't use the base layout so it doesn't get all the goodies that would allow us to easily generate a link for the current revision. Also, I think it's no big deal to let the browser use an older (cached) version of the JS/CSS in the OOPS page. (I could've hard-coded any other number there, though) > > > > > > >