* Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-12-23 15:13:47]: > --On December 24, 2005 12:00:57 AM +0100 Maxime Petazzoni > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Btw, why does this tarball should be called 0.2.1 ? Just because I > >changed some files in the archive ? I just need some explainations : > >since 0.2.0 was never released, why sould we increment the revision number > >to 0.2.1 ? > > Yes, a release is one-shot only. Once you announce it, it's technically > "burned." This is why we don't have release candidates... It is either > approved or it isn't. -- justin
Since this tarball was not yet a release, does it still apply ? You're getting self-contradictory here :) - Sam -- Maxime Petazzoni (http://www.bulix.org) -- gone crazy, back soon. leave message.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
