Noel J. Bergman wrote: >>> Furthermore: I would like to change James website to give much more >>> visibility to this release (where we say that the "best available" is >>> 2.2.0 I would change it to 2.3.0RC3 > > Arguably, we should not refer to it as the best available until 2.3.0 is a > real Release. Since it IS the best available, we should really start > thinking about publishing it as a Release.
The problem is that as soon as we'll get more users we'll probably find bugs on the code that we don't use/test. So my idea was to give much more visibility to this RC using at least a news so that we could include some more bug fix into 2.3.0 before making it final and maybe avoid working on a 2.3.1 few days after the final release ;-) Have you any hint/proposal about this? Stefano --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
