|
How can one add revision bars when updating an article? I tried going to the HTML source and tweaking it like this:
<p style="border-left: 4px solid red;">
But nothing appears.
When I preview the article, nothing appears. But when I go back to editing it, the revision bars are there, albeit broken after each paragraph and hard up against the text.
|
|
|
|
|
Our article editor is a little fussy. It strips out a lot of things. And our editorial guidelines don't allow bars so if an editor came across your article, they would likely remove it.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
I guess blue text won't make it past them either! 
|
|
|
|
|
razzfazz68 wrote: REDACTED
No need for this, marked as abuse.
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
modified 25-Sep-19 17:07pm.
|
|
|
|
|
next time you might edit the subject before publishing... as you are doing his job with 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.
|
|
|
|
|
 Indeed.
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
I have downloaded the source of the FRACTINT package, a fractal generator that allows compiling the same source to run under MS-DOS, 16-bit Windows, and 32-bit X-Windows.
The writers, a group of otherwise unconnected programmers called the 'Stone Soup Programmers', have long since disbanded, and I cannot find any link to them. (They used to communicate via Compusrve (!)) They do, however, say in the program's about box that non-commercial distribution by BBS operators is encouraged.
I have performed a substantial amount of work to get the code to compile in 16-, 32-, and 64-bit Windows, removing a lot of the cruft that collected over the years.
Under the circumstances, would an article describing this (including the modified source code) be acceptable?
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
If my vote has any value for you... I think yes and would personally like to read it.
As long as there are not possible licences / plagiarism issues... I can't see why it would not be acceptable.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
This would make an awesome article indeed.
"Five fruits and vegetables a day? What a joke!
Personally, after the third watermelon, I'm full."
|
|
|
|
|
I've started working on it...
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the report. Currently we have an error where I can't change Articles back into Technical Blog entries. Once that is fixed I will do so.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Ewington wrote: Once that is fixed I will do so.
The list is going to be big  
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.
|
|
|
|
|
I have published this blog 12 days back, but yesterday got a mail saying - " Unfortunately, due to abuse, we have been forced to reconsider our policies on all third party submissions and your article has been removed." . Also there is a list saying if those are followed, then it can be republished. So I changed the blog category to third party tools, I am waiting for it to get published, but still no success. My point is, it is posted in an intent to help somebody (not in adv. intent). Let me know when this will be published under that category.
Also, I did not get the reason for abuse or deletion. If you can mention that, I will be consider those next time while posting.
modified 12-Sep-19 2:08am.
|
|
|
|
|
Sadly because your blog entry has links and requires Travis CI (which has a paid version) we cannot host the article. If you made a post indicating a problem setting up Travis CI that you worked around, then you can post the article.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
Travis has both plans for paid and free ( to run CI for open source projects). I have used travi-ci.org which is for free or open source project. The tutorial does not need any travis subscription to setup or run. If you see the screenshot, it points to travis-ci.org. Sorry for the confusion, please guide me , what changes I can do to keep this blog up.
Please visit travis-ci.org for more info. Usually I have seen many open source projects uses travis-ci, you can notice the build-passing image in their readme page. This will definitely help them on setting up integration test and coverage which I mentioned in the blog.
|
|
|
|
|
But it does have a paid version, which means your article is connected (no matter how tenuously) to a paid version.
I'm sure you're just here to help. It's not just a matter of not accepting your article that uses a free version, it's also a matter of making sure that future, less scrupulous authors (who are really only there to promote the paid version of their product) can't point to your article and say, "well this article is allowed, why isn't mine?"
It's not fair, but, there are too many people who would take advantage of the situation so it has to be this way.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
Does it makes sense if I remove Travis and use any other free CI tool (say Jenkins) and demonstrates the same thing(I mean the original idea of blog will remain the same) and republish the same blog, will it gets accepted/ published? If yes, I will work on this and submit again.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes that would be acceptable.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for helping me out, I will get it by 1-2 days, please help in case of further issues, I don't want my effort go useless.
|
|
|
|
|
I recommendo you to read: CodeProject Plagiarism FAQ[^]
(Just in case)
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Hey Sean, hope you are doing well. As promised, I have updated my content to point to jenkins (Java integration test with dockerized DB in jenkins[^]. This has most of thing mentioned in original article, but did some customisation to match with existing content. Please let me know, how I can request to un-delete it , so that it can be reviewed and if suitable, will be published.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Good catch. I have removed all the links and made sure they were blog entries.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you
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.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
