They're already present in the new upgrading guide
Folded upgrading "list of changes" into 4.0.0 guide
They duplicate each other, and create confusion in the upgrading
doc because there's *both* an "overview" of changes at the top,
and "important changes" at the bottom - why are they at the bottom when they're important?
Added "skip" and "continue" anchor links
[ci skip]
🚧 Original upgrading doc.
I'm keeping it around just so I know what content hasn't been restructured.
🚧 Setting outline of new upgrading guide.
I'm just outlining the TOC here.
https://github.com/silverstripe/silverstripe-upgrader/issues/72🚧 Typo correction.
🚧 Move most of original content into new structure.
📝 Documenting how to recompose your dependencies.
📝 Finish documenting the reorganise command.
📝 Add a conlusion to upgrade
📝 Drafting environment upgrade doc
Move environment upgrade doc out of change log and integrating it into the upgrading guide.
📝 Document how to namespace project
🚧 Working on step 4.
📝 Adding doc for the upgrade step.
Finalise first draft of the upgrade guide.
Remove typo
Implementing feedback on the doc.
Implementing upgrade guide feedback.wq
Add refrence to upgrade guide into change log.
Implement specific upgrade guide peer review suggestion.
Wording tweaks.
Remove reference to ACME and rewrite overview.
The end of the upgrading guide tweaks ... I think.
- Stronger wording around "use composer"
- Consistent domain and email address naming
- Removed example for publishing non-composer modules (those shouldn't be encouraged)
- Removed instructions for installing modules from archives
[ci skip]
Based on a community question about upgrading their site manually, they followed the instructions but were not aware of the additional modules now required.
