Talk:OTA Updates/2013

rowspan

I was wondering what you all think on this new design. --adaminsull (talk) 15:53, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Using rowspan on the version and build number seems fine to me, but I don't find it fitting for the comments. As for the build type, I think it looks fine as long as it spans over the same version and build number. (e.g. "Release" for 5.1.1 build 9B206, in my opinion, should use a different cell from "Release" for 6.0 build 10A423.) --Dialexio (talk) 15:59, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I actually do agree. I will continue but not for Type and Comments which I will change those back to normal. --adaminsull (talk) 16:02, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree with comments but I will do Type as its looks strange otherwise. --adaminsull (talk) 00:13, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Dialexio What do you think? Can I do it and close this? --adaminsull (talk) 14:31, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

My thoughts on this the same as before, except for possibly shifting the release type to the left of the download URL like the following example. (I think this may warrant more feedback, though.) --Dialexio (talk) 17:17, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Version	Build	Prerequisite Build	Type	OTA Download URL	Comments	File Size
6.0b2	10A5338d	10A5316k	Beta	URL		FILE SIZE
6.0b3	10A5355d	10A5338d		URL		FILE SIZE
6.0b4	10A5376e	10A5355d		URL		FILE SIZE
6.0	10A403	N/A	Release	URL		FILE SIZE
6.0.1	10A523	N/A	Release	URL		FILE SIZE
		10A403		URL		FILE SIZE

Thekirbylover said via iMessage that he prefers my way. We do have rowspan for other stuff so it makes it seem correct to add Type as well. I would not do comments as they are best left. http://d.pr/i/rv7i is an example of what it would look like my way. Of course I would add class="nobborderplz" --adaminsull (talk) 17:39, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Delete the Type column?

This is a bit off-topic, but do we even need the Type column? You can easily tell if it's a beta release or not by looking at the version number… --Dialexio (talk) 20:01, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Well no as tbh I was thinking that not long ago. Shall I remove it? --adaminsull (talk) 20:57, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I think we should hear from others first. --Dialexio (talk) 23:35, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree with removing. —thekirbylover 02:35, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree with the removal. The "b" in the version should be enough to indicate the beta. --http (talk) 21:29, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Shall I remove it now then? --adaminsull (talk) 23:30, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

I will do It now as we have just had yes replies. --adaminsull (talk) 00:11, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Done. Any issues let me know. --adaminsull (talk) 00:43, 18 March 2013 (UTC)