Recent Topics

1 Aug 07, 2009 18:39    

My b2evolution Version: 1.10.x

I saw this link listed on the main b2evolution.net recent blogs: htt[/b]p://www.trish[b]ayearwood.com/ and it looks like a really nice site -- then I viewed the source to check the b2evo version (don't know why) and saw that it is running 1.10.x...

oh well, at least it's running b2evo...

2 Aug 07, 2009 19:12

Am I tripping? ... apart from the fact that the link redirects to a folder down .... which is crap seo ... I digress ... urm, where *exactly* did you find evo on that domain?

¥

3 Aug 07, 2009 19:26

The news section is an evo blog:

http://www.trishayearwood.com/news.php

More of a 'Chat away' thread than a support thread maybe :D

L

4 Aug 07, 2009 19:30

source wrote:

<!--<p class="center">powered by<br />
<a href="http://b2evolution.net/" title="b2evolution home"><img src="http://www1.trishayearwood.com/current/rsc/img/b2evolution_logo_80.gif" alt="b2evolution" width="80" height="17" border="0" class="middle" /></a></p>-->

Link removed. Nice looking site otherwise huh?

¥

5 Aug 07, 2009 19:36

I actually looked at the source and found the

<meta name="generator" content="b2evolution 1.10.2" />

why would you comment out the lines about "powered by"? I mean - might as well remove them...

anyway, nice looking site

6 Aug 07, 2009 19:41

Agreed, not only do they remove the link to b2evo, but they waste my bandwidth by using an html <!--comment--> to do it

¥

7 Aug 07, 2009 19:56

It's also a crappy site.

8 Aug 07, 2009 21:18

EdB wrote:

It's also a crappy site.

and here was me being all diplomatic and shit .... dunno why I bothered :P

¥

9 Aug 08, 2009 02:21

Hey, nice to see those old 1.x blogs chugging away though, huh?

10 Aug 08, 2009 02:44

filthio wrote:

Hey, nice to see those old 1.x blogs chugging away though, huh?

One of the most neatoest bits with this thing is that security holes are extremely rare. I'm pretty sure the last one was way back in the 0.* generation, so 1.10.3 is a perfectly acceptable program to continue using. Assuming "it works for you" eh?

11 Aug 13, 2009 19:04

It sure does work for me. Running continuously since 26/10/05.

12 Aug 13, 2009 19:36

filthio wrote:

Running continuously since 26/10/05.

Wow, my I've had to reboot my mind several times in that period ..... and don't even mention upgrades!

¥

13 Aug 14, 2009 12:02

Yeah, but I didn't say what I was running _from_ ...

14 Aug 15, 2009 18:10

I've had to re-boot my feet far more frequently in the same period ..... I can just about keep my balance putting them on when I'm stationary, kudos for doing it on the fly ;)

¥


Form is loading...