Template talk:Current versions

The problem with linking to the release notes, is that this template is now no-longer language agnostic, and so needs some form of translation (perhaps it can be automated?). Or are the release notes given in English only? I haven't checked, but if that is the case then the current links are fine. --HappyDog 03:47, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Update required

Versions 1.18.2 and 1.17.3 have been released. In addition, there is a test version 1.19.0beta2. GreenReaper (talk) 20:15, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

New proposal

There is a new proposal for this template at User:Qgil/Template:Current versions. It tries to address the problem that last versions and their links are not visible anymore at the main page via Template:MediaWiki News. Apart from agreement on the format, it requires i18n for the few strings available.--Qgil (talk) 22:19, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

I am sorry for answering late. Hmm ... this template should be as easily maintainable as possible. Therefore having strings in it which need translation should be avoided. What about just linking the version number imho preferably to the announce email with no icons and no additional description. However linking to the release notes page would be an alternative, too. Cheers --[[kgh]] (talk) 22:12, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

I have added your proposal at User:Qgil/Template:Current versions and Im not sure... "Maintenance release"/ "Security release" are just 3-4 (very informative) words and we have releases only every couple of months or so. It doesn't look like a big overhead for the current translators. The icons were used in News and they are not affected by localization. Any reason to remove them? What is the benefit of linking to an (ugly) email in a web archive compared to linking directly to the wiki page with the release notes? Or even better, link to the release announcements instead of directly to the more detailed notes? In fact, an idea would be to start localizing the release announcements - see Talk:MediaWiki 1.21. Even with English-only announcements I think the first proposal still stands.--Qgil (talk) 23:14, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

I just added the even more simplified version I had in mind. Probably I would like to link to the ugly e-mail because this is the official announcement nobody can edit. :) However, in case the release pages is identical to the contents of the e-mail it is definitely ok and perhaps easier to link to them. Localisation takes time. I predict that the next version is out until the last announcement was updated/translated in all languages with a main page. This circle starts with every new release. Just having the icons is imho not good since they are not self-explanatory. Cheers --[[kgh]] (talk) 23:31, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Ok, edited the template based on your double-simplified version. It fulfills the basic complaint (no link from home to release notes). I had to set the links directly there instead of editing the release templates because of Template talk:MW ancient release number. We can keep improving from there. More suggestions welcome. Thank you!--Qgil (talk) 00:51, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

I have added 1.18.6 as well. It was released at the same time than the last 1.19(.3) and it was also mentioned in the security release announcement.--Qgil (talk) 01:01, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Looks cool to me. :) Improvements can always be done. Perhaps a note should be added to the templates that this one needs to be updated, too. Some people will not like that you added 1.18.6 since it is unsupported. I also believe that is obsoletes as soon as 1.19.4 gets released and not before. However, this is debatable. I case of trouble this will have to be removed to keep things calm. Cheers --[[kgh]] (talk) 01:51, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

1.18.6

I believe that this version may now be removed from the template. Cheers --[[kgh]] (talk) 20:26, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

 Done - Thanks. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 20:29, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Content needs love

Heiya, there are two changes which need be done to the template's content:

1. It shows the branch 1.22 instead of the released version 1.22.0
2. It advertises 1.20.8 instead of 1.21.3 as the legacy version.

Thanks and cheers --[[kgh]] (talk) 17:27, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

 Done --wargo (talk) 17:48, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

LTS version not shown

The LTS section of this template needs to be uncommented; the latest version is no longer an LTS revision, and it is still an actively-supported branch. GreenReaper (talk) 16:52, 12 October 2015 (UTC)