Merge conflicts are bad, so let's make sure only one person at a time can do work on our code! Yeah, because we hired a team of 10 so 9 people can sit idle while 1 works
@Bob Mods can remove entries in the edit history. There was a change made to allow this without involving devs. IIRC it takes two mods acting together to do this.
Up until last week, moderators would have to contact the Community Managers to redact private information from a post, but thanks to Jarrod this is now been turned on for moderators to handle.
By going to the post revision page, mods will now see a redact option:
Choosing this, you'll be...
@Bob So you could just delete everything from the post. The post would appear empty with no edit history (except visible to community managers). "Community Managers can see a list of all redactions and review the changes made if needed."
My thoughts are that Wi-Fi is only used as Fidelity within the Logo context.. However originally it may have been used without the Logo context (archived posts).. however something occurred in 2002 which separated them..
@jokerdino yea, just wondering what would happen if there was a conflict... I've tried to redact things from SCM before, which is a pretty similar concept :P
To clarify, moderators cannot hide a revision. That's not what the tool does. What happens is a moderator essentially suggests an edit to the revision and, if approved, the content of that particular revision is completely replaced with the new content. We do have an indicator in the revision history when a revision has been redacted, which gives the reason for the redaction in a tooltip. It's currently only visible to moderators, though I can't remember if there was any reason not to show it to all users. We may just make that visible to everyone. — animuson ♦Feb 7 at 19:12
yea, we all mess up and write incorrect answers that need to be edited or deleted, but just wrong info in deleted history does no harm to... anyone, really. maybe to your pride.
> What happens is a moderator essentially suggests an edit to the revision and, if approved, the content of that particular revision is completely replaced with the new content.
If something else happens, that's either a bug or animuson is wrong/lying.
I can agree that it's redacted. That's the whole point of redaction.
I can't agree that it's purged, based on what SE semi-officially said in MSE. Or, if it actually, really, does do that... then they're giving incorrect info.
I'm also confused by... well, @jokerdino said he redacted the first revision of a chain, while @JourneymanGeek said he redacted the last revision with the offending content.
@jokerdino Yea, but I wouldn't expect that to automatically carry on to subsequent revision entries, based on what SE people said. Unless revision entries are only ever stored as deltas.
I have a .NET 4.0 dll project that is being called by a .NET 2.0 project. Is there a way to reconcile the difference in framework?
Not that way round, no. The .NET 4 CLR can load .NET 2 assemblies (usually - there are a few exceptions for mixed-mode assemblies, IIRC), but not vice versa.
Yo...
now I don't know where Mac got the idea for the "dock" at the bottom of the screen; that may have been a NeXT thing -- but KDE is responsible for a lot of stuff that Mac did, and Windows is also starting to mimic the Mac now
@Bob I notice that; and as a developer I get some random LBrta.c file from some random dependency I unpacked at some point showing up ahead of actual applications
@jokerdino yeah, except that each copy degrades the quality a little bit, like repeatedly encoding an MP3 in a lossy format, or repeatedly photocopying something
and the copy chain goes: KDE < OS X < Windows 10 < ... everyone else ... < Gnome
Up until last week, moderators would have to contact the Community Managers to redact private information from a post, but thanks to Jarrod this is now been turned on for moderators to handle.
By going to the post revision page, mods will now see a redact option:
Choosing this, you'll be...
