1,571
edits
User talk:Sean Fennel: Difference between revisions
→RC patrol: sure is
Sean Fennel (talk | contribs) (→RC patrol: sure is) |
|||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
:Done! | :Done! | ||
I'm sure we'll be upgraded at some point. It seems [[John Stanton]] is hosting a ton of media wikis so will have to dig in to do them all at once at some point. Is it worth pushing for? [[TedErnst]] | <small>[[User talk:TedErnst|talk]]</small> 18:06, 11 Apr 2006 (EDT) | I'm sure we'll be upgraded at some point. It seems [[John Stanton]] is hosting a ton of media wikis so will have to dig in to do them all at once at some point. Is it worth pushing for? [[TedErnst]] | <small>[[User talk:TedErnst|talk]]</small> 18:06, 11 Apr 2006 (EDT) | ||
::This is copied from mediawiki.org: | |||
<blockquote>IMPORTANT: Running a 1.3 or 1.4 wiki and don't want to jump to 1.5 yet? Be sure to upgrade to 1.3.17 or 1.4.11, also released today. Versions prior to 1.3.16 and 1.4.10 have a serious data corruption bug which is triggered by a spambot known to operate in the wild.</blockquote> | |||
Note that they're on 1.4.1'''5''' currently. 1.4.13 added protection against WMF vulnerability attacks, and 1.4.15 renders more accurately in the IE7 beta. Oh, and 1.6 also introduces CAPTCHA support. You could do it before, but it took a lot more work in 1.5 than before. So in summary, Yeah, it's worth pushing for. —[[Sean Fennel|<span style="font-family: Kristen ITC, Times New Roman;">User:Sean Fennel</span>]][[User talk:Sean Fennel|<span style="font-family: Kristen ITC, Times New Roman;">@</span>]] 20:35, 11 Apr 2006 (EDT) | |||