> T e d : > > If I understand the X.X.X release convention, a Vote doesn't have to > be held for a release to occur > but only to qualify it as Alpha/Beta/GA ? Is that correct? > > If that is so I could just stay up tonight and do a release and we > would vote on the quality > at a later date, once it has been a bit. > > -Rob
Yes, if we were able to include a validator 1.1.1 and it later went to GA, then our release could go to GA too.
Though, I wouldn't be optimistic about 1.2.0 going GA, but anything's possible :)
We could also just do a 1.2.1 once the Validator 1.1.1 was out too. My personal goal is to just "tap the keg" on 1.2.x, so we can get in the habit of releasing more often.
The Validator 1.1.0 has a bug that shows up a fatal bug in TC 3.X but not in 4.X....
Agreed, go ahead and use c-v 1.1.0, though if no one objects I'll do a release of validator and
if it comes out in time you have the option of using that instead.
The only stumbling block now is that I need to change my public key to use stronger
encryption so Martin doesn't get a 'warning' from my signed files.
-Rob
-T.
Robert Leland wrote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
