The long standing rule is that templates should not be updated because, "the user might have changed something".
1. Would it not be possible to have a hash in the file, so that if the template was not updated by the user, that there was a mechanism for updating all the templates that have been updated in the GIT, but not updated by the user , simply with code that checked & validated the hashes on the files.
2. A better mechanism for bulk updating templates, rather than having to go thru hundreds or thousands of individual files playing "hunt the changes"
3. an option to roll back a template, without teh need for file name changes and multiple backup copies, having to be cloned by the user, it could be managed with simple key exchanges that acted as lookup values for the real files.
1. Would it not be possible to have a hash in the file, so that if the template was not updated by the user, that there was a mechanism for updating all the templates that have been updated in the GIT, but not updated by the user , simply with code that checked & validated the hashes on the files.
2. A better mechanism for bulk updating templates, rather than having to go thru hundreds or thousands of individual files playing "hunt the changes"
3. an option to roll back a template, without teh need for file name changes and multiple backup copies, having to be cloned by the user, it could be managed with simple key exchanges that acted as lookup values for the real files.
Comment