Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with discussion
Search options not deleted
user 68794
The question you're asking is designed to solicit opinions or best-practices on a particular topic, with the goal of reaching community consensus.
5
votes
1
answer
80
views
Do we really need a backup-exec-2010 tag when there's a perfectly good backupexec tag?
Is the rather recent spate of retagging of questions around Backup Exec with backup-exec-2010 by user KCotreau strictly necessary?
We've already got a perfectly servicable backupexec tag, and my imp …
- 8,110