Alexander Malysh wrote:
Hello Bruno,
1.3.2 should be good tested and remaining bug's should be fixed first before we can call it stable (IMO) and cvs version (before 1.3.2) was not tested by too much people, so we should wait a bit...
P.S. why not package 1.3.2 for debian and get it more testing?
Bruno Rodrigues wrote:
Hello all.
Does anyone have any complain about 1.3.2 in comparison with 1.2.1 ?
What do you think about releasing 1.3.2 as 1.2.2 stable so I can package it for Debian and we could have the "latest stable" version in Sarge ?
Stipe ?
I'd like to go for the 1.4 stable branch, rather then having this "major step" under 1.2.
This is historically also been made for 1.3 devel branch.
So, I'd like to see 1.4.0 stable rolled in about a week, to give people time to identify any remaining open issues and get the issues out of the BTS too.
Stipe
mailto:stolj_{at}_wapme.de ------------------------------------------------------------------- Wapme Systems AG
Vogelsanger Weg 80 40470 Düsseldorf, NRW, Germany
phone: +49.211.74845.0 fax: +49.211.74845.299
mailto:info_{at}_wapme-systems.de http://www.wapme-systems.de/ -------------------------------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (Cygwin)
mIsEP6mcYwEEAMDnUiUwrbb+xwTFWN6TxF2+XZu7/alwJMeCwMBRvXtPZqfjpPhS OkBpU0F4TrVuugz1HINTSaJTYq10AzDQXp5NkyWgckqW79nPAWuOX0dicbJk+cN2 nM2TI4KaxUDe6u8hghNEnH/i2lXsUu9apnP/iixzV81VC2je3uc9hZpnAAYptEVT dGlwZSBUb2xqIChUZWNobm9sb2d5IENlbnRlciAmIFJlc2VhcmNoIExhYikgPHRv bGpAd2FwbWUtc3lzdGVtcy5kZT6ItAQTAQIAHgUCP6mcYwIbAwYLCQgHAwIDFQID AxYCAQIeAQIXgAAKCRABV0w1BqPYRuSqA/wPzsQxao2YePENCtgRTrO86U6zg3sl OcS6CJFI4FZP5h/xD3GRsNH1+MPSvZlomDdpFnr547DGz/Kq9MXuQwVvlVig5yWZ K5dtKp1r5YLhxJQBhfirZbRFFnYmf19f18J8OoS28tuFVftDl1AIwJS3HLyBTv6H g2HyLAEKQIp30Q== =aYCI -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
