| Previous by date: | 26 Nov 2003 06:37:26 -0000 Re: is revhistory _that_ needed?, Y Giridhar Appaji Nag |
| Next by date: | 26 Nov 2003 06:37:26 -0000 Re: is revhistory _that_ needed?, Tabatha Marshall |
| Previous in thread: | 26 Nov 2003 06:37:26 -0000 Re: is revhistory _that_ needed?, Y Giridhar Appaji Nag |
| Next in thread: | 26 Nov 2003 06:37:26 -0000 Re: is revhistory _that_ needed?, Tabatha Marshall |
you wrote: > But in my opinion, at least the latest revision should show, for readers > who want to know how up to date the work is. But why do I need it to show up as revision history, if I have the publishing date and version specified? Can I just keep the current version and pubdate and comment the revhistory for just my own memo? Artemio.
| Previous by date: | 26 Nov 2003 06:37:26 -0000 Re: is revhistory _that_ needed?, Y Giridhar Appaji Nag |
| Next by date: | 26 Nov 2003 06:37:26 -0000 Re: is revhistory _that_ needed?, Tabatha Marshall |
| Previous in thread: | 26 Nov 2003 06:37:26 -0000 Re: is revhistory _that_ needed?, Y Giridhar Appaji Nag |
| Next in thread: | 26 Nov 2003 06:37:26 -0000 Re: is revhistory _that_ needed?, Tabatha Marshall |