Brion Vibber wrote:
Magnus Manske wrote:
The first one you know, the validation feature, in
its current
incarnation. It has already been pre-field-tested by some people from
the German wikipedia.
This is still going to need rewriting before we can safely use it.
Well, it could've been ready right now, if you had told me what's wrong
when I asked, about a dozen times, for month...
The other one we talked about, the "stable
version". This is a currently
a very basic implementation, and will be overhauled by me to add some
usability and reduce confusion (e.g., clicking "edit" on the stable
version page).
Please confirm that you have talked with Tim, who is already working on version
tagging keeping our caching requirements in mind.
No I didn't, I wasn't aware to that. (Which probably means I heared
about it but promptly forgot;-)
Anyway, mine is very simple: a new field in the page table, indication
the current "stable" version, or "0" if there is none. And a small
notice in the sub-header, with links.
Tim, if yours is more advances/better integrated/favorable in some other
way, please tell me so I won't waste any more time on my implementation
here.
Magnus