Actions

J2.5 talk

Difference between revisions of "Add article title to read more link"

From Joomla! Documentation

(Add in reasoning for review tag)
 
m (Needs Review Tag: answer)
 
(3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
== Needs Review Tag ==
 
== Needs Review Tag ==
 
This article was copied across from a J1.5 tutorial (see same title in J1.5 namespace). It hasn't been tested on J!2.5/3.x and really needs to be!
 
This article was copied across from a J1.5 tutorial (see same title in J1.5 namespace). It hasn't been tested on J!2.5/3.x and really needs to be!
 +
: Already changed the 3.1 version. the 2.5 is the same as 3.1: no need to override, setting for title is available and code already in core. Maybe 2.5 and 3.1 need to be combined into version less article. [[User:Sovainfo|Sovainfo]] ([[User talk:Sovainfo|talk]]) 20:54, 8 September 2013 (CDT)
 +
:: We might as well just let them stay the way they are now. We have to think about is the future and as every new version is released we will be rolling the docs from the previous version into the new version and then update those. Yes we will get some duplication, but rather have duplication then docs that are incorrect for the version.  [[User:Hutchy68|Tom Hutchison]] ([[User talk:Hutchy68|talk]]) 18:24, 9 September 2013 (CDT)

Latest revision as of 17:24, 9 September 2013

Needs Review Tag

This article was copied across from a J1.5 tutorial (see same title in J1.5 namespace). It hasn't been tested on J!2.5/3.x and really needs to be!

Already changed the 3.1 version. the 2.5 is the same as 3.1: no need to override, setting for title is available and code already in core. Maybe 2.5 and 3.1 need to be combined into version less article. Sovainfo (talk) 20:54, 8 September 2013 (CDT)
We might as well just let them stay the way they are now. We have to think about is the future and as every new version is released we will be rolling the docs from the previous version into the new version and then update those. Yes we will get some duplication, but rather have duplication then docs that are incorrect for the version. Tom Hutchison (talk) 18:24, 9 September 2013 (CDT)