This was in line with the way it was done in 2020. i.e. an update in February to cover the previous month. Do you have strong views we should change it . I am inclined to leave as is as I have socialised the links now
r
rmoff
02/19/2026, 10:50 AM
yeah, no point changing it. I should have picked this up in review.
IMHO I think it's more standard to name it based on the time period that it covers, rather than when it was written/published.
d
david radley
02/19/2026, 11:23 AM
No worries - it was something I was aware of from the start as being a bit quirky.