Done
> -----Original Message----- > From: Danny Angus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 18 October 2003 21:02 > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: James release version download link confusion... > > > ok :-) > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 17 October 2003 17:23 > > To: [email protected] > > Cc: Ray > > Subject: RE: James release version download link confusion... > > > > > > Danny, > > > > Neither Serge nor I have karma for jakarta-site2 module > (although that can > > be fixed ;-)). Would you please commit and apply the attached? > > > > I'll look at setting up our own download page(s). > > > > --- Noel > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 11:04 > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: James release version download link confusion... > > > > > > Hi, > > > > Don't worry I'm not looking to asks questions and I'm sorry not > > to post this > > to a mailing list. I can't post to the list without subscribing > > (understandably) but its hard enough keeping up with the ones I > work with, > > without adding more that I don't really need. You can forward it to the > > mailing list or others appropriate if you think it warrants it or > > you don't > > have control over this area. > > > > The http://james.apache.org/#releases page clearly states 2.1.3 as the > > latest stable and "All users are urged to upgrade to v2.1.3 as soon as > > possible." but unfortunately when you follow the link to the > download area > > http://jakarta.apache.org/site/binindex.cgi it provides a link to > > 2.1 as the > > latest release version! If you follow further down you can access the > > "special archive area" where I found the latest release I wanted > > http://archive.apache.org/dist/jakarta/james/. I got luscious > because I've > > been running 2.1.2 and thought it a bit funny when downloading > > the file and > > the onscreen version number reported as 2.1, then I checked the > date/time > > stamp of the manifest file and it is Dec 2002 inline with your > > 2.1 release. > > > > Anyway hope it helps and sorry to bother you if I'm talking rubbish. > > > > Regards, > > > > Ray > > >
