Development Discussion Board

I am still against the idea of dropping support for a style that is used by a large portion of the community. Part of the idea of 3.1 (as opposed to 4.0) is that a large portion of backwards compatibility is maintained. In this case we can do the following. Keep the decision of dropping subsilver2 ...

As you posted in the other topic, such a number is already in the link though it may need to be hashed in order for this to work on a per-user basis. I think it's not a bad idea. Sometimes I don't really feel like logging in after clicking on the e-mail link.

Might have better luck posting this in our 3.0 Styles Support and Discussion forum.

Might be something to consider for 3.2. Might want to create an RFC in the 3.2 RFC forum.

Maybe this isn't a good idea, and im not saying it should be included in 3.1, but i think it would be a good idea. I don't think 3.1 is any longer taking RFCs, maybe move it for 3.2 or do whatever you mods what to do with it :D If you knew that then why didn't you just post this in the 3.2 forum? :...

Because if you don't login then you will not receive any further notifications of replies to the topic. This is the reason for the forced login.

The 3.1 RFC phase (request for features) ended back in July. This would end up going to 3.2 if anything.

Why would we continue supporting subSilver after 3.1 is released anyways? That would be up to the style author that decides they're going to continue developing past the 3.0.x line. EDIT: nevermind...I was just reminded that we did indeed decide to support it beyond 3.1. Carry on...nothing to see h...

You'll get more responses if you post your question in our MOD Writers Discussion forum over at phpbb.com.

It could replace it but definitely wouldn't be added to the default package. subSilver2 will be removed to make it easier to maintain the style by only having to worry about one style. Not about to add some other style in ts place and still have more than one style.