|
Before there was a counter "vXX" in the Q&A items. Where it could be checked what has changed between one version and the other one...
is that not possible anymore?
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
As far as I can see, it's still there. The only time it doesn't appear is if the item hasn't been edited.
Eg:
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
When I posted this, I had edited a QA and it didn't appear... weird
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
An example: what is XCOPY I:\*.* F:\ /E /F /H ? is a question of 2013, and I wanted to check, who did the improvement and what was changed
But can't see the vXX Link or the name of the editor as I reported previously.
I don't know if it has something to do with being at work, but I can't see it (I will check it this afternoon at home)
[EDIT]
Weird... this other question below in the list... Generate popup using windows service does got it:
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
The Updated information applies to the whole thread and not only the question itself. The date of the XCOPY question has been updated because a new solution has been posted. Simple to recognise in this case but hard when the new solution has been removed meanwhile for being spam.
|
|
|
|
|
Jochen Arndt wrote: The date of the question has been updated because a new solution has been posted
TBH that makes not really sense for me. The second example has come back to the beginning of the list due to a new solution too, but the timestamp of the question itself is the same as it was.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
That has been AFAIK changed some time ago upon request:
When the solution is removed (as in the second example), the update timestamp is reset to the previous state.
However, I would expect it then to have the timestamp of the newest solution because that was after the last edit.
|
|
|
|
|
Jochen Arndt wrote: AFAIK changed some time ago upon request:
I didn't know about it. Then it does make sense.
Jochen Arndt wrote: However, I would expect it then to have the timestamp of the newest solution because that was after the last edit.
That's what I don't understand... why with one yes and with the other not
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
You can still get to the version history by playing with the querystring:
what is XCOPY I:\*.* F:\ /E /F /H ?[^]
As you can see, there's only one version of that question. 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
I already supposed that it didn't show vXX, because there only is a version. But I still find it the behavior a bit inconsistent.
Start playing with the link is something I would have tried if needed to go deeper.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
There seems to be a limit on image size - If I take a pic with my phone it doesn't load, it always just times out. If I view the image in windows and screenshot that it loads just fine.
Can I suggest that loaded images get "normalized" to a standard size for saving, so phone pics can load OK rather than having a size limit that you can't see?
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
When I did my message I had the feeling that 200k is the top limit, so I reduced my images before loading them up. After that, no problems at all.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
There probably needs to be a better error message for that than "timed out".
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
I do agree with that
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
How about "unexpected error"?
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry for piggy-backing on the thread, but for me only the top section of the images show in the thread. They show ok when clicked on.
|
|
|
|
|
They show up fine for me - Chrome Version 68.0.3440.106 (Official Build) (64-bit) / Win 10
Browser? CTRL+F5?
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
They're working fine for me now too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've increased the timeout and there shouldn't be any actual upload restriction. Can you let me know the size of the images that are failing for you?
I have seen timeouts myself and if the issue continues I'll get a bigger boat.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
That's better - I can upload a 2592 x 1456, 467KB image with no problems.
But ... when I click on "open link in a new tab" to see the "full size" version I get a 404:
I get a 404 from the image I loaded yesterday as well.
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Update: Nelek was getting "contains errors" messages, but the image loads fine for me now.
Re: JUST A TEST - IGNORE THIS![^]
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
We had a bunch of posts today that went to moderation, but which took huge time to open the page - CP timed out a couple of times with Hungry Hamsters - when finally loaded it was 5.7MB of database rows.
There is no good reason to post a QA question (or any other post) that big: nobody is going to wade through it in search of anything much at all. So perhaps set a limit - even 200K is probably well over the top - and automatically reject any posts over that? It's just clogging up the system, using up your expensive bandwidth, and slowing the response of the site for no good purpose.
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Good point. I'll get on it. Thanks mate.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Opening a search result (from the top right Lounge search editbox) that has an old date - like 2014 in this example - is redirecting me on the first page of the Lounge instead of the expected post, example:
The Lounge[^]
and a side question : is it possible to search for somebody in the who's who section ?
modified 22-Aug-18 10:32am.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
