Here is some of the original discussion.
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Tim Spindler tjspind...@gmail.com wrote:
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
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
...@list.georgialibraries.org
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] 2.3 Documentation progress.
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
...@coffeecode.net]
Sent: August 9, 2012 9:50 AM
To: Evergreen Development Discussion List
Cc: open-ils-documentat...@list.georgialibraries.org
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] 2.3 Documentation progress.
Hi Robert:
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 9:31 AM, Soulliere, Robert
robert.soulli
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
