Hi All,
I set up Documentation processing for Evergreen 2.3. This is in “Alpha mode”
and available for review.
It is available in the “Under Development” section of our documentation launch
page:
http://docs.evergreen-ils.org/
I also added an outline page for folks working on content to
Hi Robert:
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 9:31 AM, Soulliere, Robert
robert.soulli...@mohawkcollege.ca wrote:
Hi All,
I set up Documentation processing for Evergreen 2.3. This is in “Alpha mode”
and available for review.
It is available in the “Under Development” section of our documentation
Hi Dan,
The assume it is all good from the last version approach works for me and
makes things easier for everyone involved.
The one thing I was concerned about was drastic changes to processes from one
major release to the next. I understand that beta testers should sniff those
out and
On Aug 9, 2012, at 08:50 , Dan Scott wrote:
Hi Robert:
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 9:31 AM, Soulliere, Robert
robert.soulli...@mohawkcollege.ca wrote:
Hi All,
I set up Documentation processing for Evergreen 2.3. This is in “Alpha
mode” and available for review.
It is available in the
On Aug 9, 2012, at 09:14 , Soulliere, Robert wrote:
Hi Dan,
The assume it is all good from the last version approach works for me and
makes things easier for everyone involved.
The one thing I was concerned about was drastic changes to processes from one
major release to the next. I
Hi all,
I also support the idea of pulling all documentation forward. Ideally,
it would be great if DIG could review everything before it was moved up,
but I think we've found that volunteers cannot always get to this in a
timely manner.
I also like Alexey's idea to identify the last time a
On Aug 9, 2012, at 9:14 AM, Soulliere, Robert wrote:
The assume it is all good from the last version approach works for me and
makes things easier for everyone involved.
sarcasm
This is why I always follow the 1.6 documentation when I'm trying to figure out
how something works
/sarcasm
In
I also agree that it is better to port the older version. If we get enough
volunteers every to test things in time, I would say we could switch to a
more though method but that does not appear to be happening. Justin's
solution also may give some indicating to where the data came from and
might
