Sorry, this is all explained by me getting all confused with the version numbers. Ignore my last post (except to point out that a new release needs to come soon...)
y 2009/3/22 Daniel Kahn Gillmor <d...@fifthhorseman.net> > On 03/22/2009 10:29 PM, Yaron Minsky wrote: > > I'm really confused. People have piped in in both directions on this > one, > > so does someone have the definitive story? Is 1.0.10 the one that > behaves > > correctly, or 1.0.9? > > So far i haven't heard anyone claim that 1.0.10 works correctly. 1.1.0 > works correctly, and david shaw just pointed out that 1.0.9 works > correctly. I believe 1.0.10 is the only version with this particular bug. > > > And yes, we should get a 1.0.11 release out soon. I was waiting for the > > IPv6 patch to settle down and for everyone to agree that it worked for > IPv4 > > and IPv6 installations alike. > > > do you mean you're hoping to release 1.1.1 soon? Or is there some sort > of branched development process going on? > > --dkg > > > _______________________________________________ > Sks-devel mailing list > Sks-devel@nongnu.org > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/sks-devel > >
_______________________________________________ Sks-devel mailing list Sks-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/sks-devel
