From f24849142e68a0f3a0d5525df5079116855c2713 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jan Friedenstab <8794084+jfriedenstab@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2024 13:56:28 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Update
 docs/components/best-practices/modeling/choosing-the-resource-binding-type.md

Co-authored-by: Mark Sellings <mark.sellings@camunda.com>
---
 .../modeling/choosing-the-resource-binding-type.md             | 3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/docs/components/best-practices/modeling/choosing-the-resource-binding-type.md b/docs/components/best-practices/modeling/choosing-the-resource-binding-type.md
index d6165b32696..b3f31bb5f6b 100644
--- a/docs/components/best-practices/modeling/choosing-the-resource-binding-type.md
+++ b/docs/components/best-practices/modeling/choosing-the-resource-binding-type.md
@@ -44,8 +44,7 @@ Camunda 8 supports the following binding types:
               <li><p>If the process element has already been reached, you can use <a href="../../../concepts/process-instance-modification">process instance modification</a> to reactivate and relink it to the newly deployed target resource version.</p></li>
             </ul>
           </li>
-          <li><p>Be aware that using <code>latest</code> can lead to unexpected behavior if you deploy a new version of the target resource without ensuring backwards compatibility with every deployed process that depends on it.</p></li>
-          <li><p>Therefore, it might not be suited for production environments that require stability and a predictable behavior.</p></li>
+          <li><p>Be aware that using <code>latest</code> can lead to unexpected behavior if you deploy a new version of the target resource without ensuring backwards compatibility with every deployed process that depends on it.</p><p>This might not be suited for production environments that require stability and a predictable behavior.</p></li>
         </ul>
       </td>
     </tr>