Rick Hillegas wrote:
I vote for option (1). The next release vehicle looks like a second RC
to me, not a new release. As I see it, we post releases on our website
chiefly for the convenience of our users. What user value do we
provide by continuing to post 10.5.2.0?
I think the thing keeping the release notes on the website offers is an
accurate history. Like the other deprecated releases the binaries of
course would not be available. Since the release has been available on
the mirrors, someone may be using it and wonder later where it came
from and need a separate history of what was fixed in 10.5.2.0 vs the
new release,
But, as I said if you would like to go this way and the rest of the
community agrees, I can go with it. You might want to advise the user
list that they should upgrade from 10.5.2.0 to 10.5.2.1 if they are
using it.
Kathey
