No it hasn't been test on 3.0.1 because I'm running 3.03 but I don't see any reason why it wouldn't work. If you try it please report back. It would be easy to roll it back because there is only one line of original code that's deleted and I have that line of code in a comment in the new code.
nexialys - I agree that would be the most efficient but there are problems with doing that. If the user changed the image after the fact your "large thumbnail" wouldn't update. A user could use this to post a link to a picture that you wouldn't want to have on your site. The only way around that would be to store the entire image and the large thumbnail on your server but then your taking the entire bandwidth bill onto your hands for potentially very large images but it could be done.
|