21 Jun
2008
21 Jun
'08
5:08 p.m.
On Jun 21, 2008, at 3:57 PM, Jean-Vincent Drean wrote:
Right, it would be XWiki Enterprise $xwiki.version for XE for example.
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 10:52 PM, Vincent Massol
<vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
I was going to remove the field when I thought that people may like to
be able to customize this line easily (to put a product name for
example) or to put some words about their wiki instead of the xwiki
version there.
Then I'd prefer a footer text field that replaces the full footer in
that case or something like this.
Thanks
-Vincent
On Jun 20, 2008, at 7:01 PM, Jean-Vincent Drean
wrote:
As Artem stated is likely because of the jurisdiction you've picked. I
guess it's safer to use the v2.0 for now.
+1 to make visible the version of the license.
3) License
----------------
* Current : This wiki is licensed under a <a
href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/">Creative
Commons</a> license
* Proposal : This wiki is licensed under a <a
href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/">Creative
Commons</a> license
+1 but maybe we should say "Creative Commons v3.0" or use this
instead: http://tinyurl.com/5jwj8p
BTW I've used http://creativecommons.org/license/ to pick the license
and it says v2.0 in the end... any idea why is that? 4)
Version
----------------
What is this version?
If it's meant to override the version.properties file then I'd be +1
to remove this field altogether since I don't think people should
change it easily. * Current : empty, actually it's not even taken
into account if
filled
* Proposal : XWiki $xwiki.getVersion() - <a
onclick="openURL('http://www.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/Documen…
,
'_blank'); return false;"
href="http://www.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/
Documentation">Documentation</a>
1) I don't think it's XWiki's version since XWiki doesn't mean much.
It should be the product version. 2) I'm not sure about putting Documentation.
I think I'd prefer
putting a link to http://xwiki.org with the text "XWiki.org".
Not sure about this one.