Update DNN version to 10.02.03 in upgrade path#781
Update DNN version to 10.02.03 in upgrade path#781jeremy-farrance wants to merge 3 commits intoDNNCommunity:mainfrom
Conversation
jeremy-farrance
commented
Mar 11, 2026
jeremy-farrance
commented
- Updated meta dnnversion: 10.02.03
- Updated latest TO version to 10.02.03
- Moved the !NOTE about upgrading up one and changed 10.02.02 to 10.02.x
- !TIP intro, last sentence modernized
- Reversed the order of the Requirements Changes list to newest first
Updated meta dnnversion: 10.02.03 Updated latest TO version to 10.02.03 Moved the !NOTE about upgrading up one and changed 10.02.02 to 10.02.x !TIP intro, last sentence modernized Reversed the order of the Requirements Changes list to newest first
valadas
left a comment
valadas
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good to me overall, but I am not a fan of reversing the list order for the "known upgrade issues" part... Specially if the list of versions in in old-to-new order, it makes it confusing to use different ordering.
My point of view is that the majority of people upgrading - over 90% seems like a safe guess (IMHO) - are only upgrading through the most recent 2 or 3 versions. Seeing that list of 10+ known upgrade issues starting at DNN Version v3-4 is likely to cause quite a few people to skip reading the list. Whereas, starting with very recent call-outs will be much more likely to ensure they take notice. |
Moved call out up to the more logical postion
If others agree, then I would reverse both lists at least. |
1. Reversed the order for the entire document; newest first, then 2. enhanced the upgrade path table to include related notes for each version transition and clarified the requirements and prerequisites for upgrading.
|
I just made an additional TLC update so the whole page is now consistent for newest first AND added a Notes column to the grid calling out the specific and related notes to see in the list below. I also added a specific note about the CDF replacement being introduced at 10.2.0. |
|
If a visual helps... 
|
|
WOuld it be possible to just move the notes into the table, and have two separate blocks? The history stuff < 7/8 is REALLY old, we don't want to lose it, but I dont' want to cutter things so maybe a single table? |
|
@mitchelsellers - given that is a bit more work than I did, maybe call this step 1 towards that? :) |
3 participants
