On 2014-10-08 2:52 PM, Philippe Michel wrote: > There was a bug in mat files import when version 1.03 was released > (introduced about 2 weeks earlier and fixed 2 weeks later -- unlucky > timing). >
Relying on some phrases from Homer Simpson and Maxwell Smart I'd have to respond: Doh! Missed it by that much! > If you use the Windows version, what you can do is to go to > http://files.gnubg.org/media/windows/ > and replace your 1.03 version by the earlier > gnubg-1_02_001-20140206-setup.exe or by > gnubg-1_03_000-dev8-20140630-setup.exe (dev9 is already broken). > I have a feeling this one problem might be enough to warrant a new release. I was going to consider an upissue to 1.03.002 however I noticed the cache related changes which might hve me thinking 1.04.000. How confident are you that the new cache code is sound? I'm teetering on these 2 options: 1) Upissue to 1.03.002 excluding the recent cache changes (include all other changes/fixes). 2) Upissue to 1.04.000 including ALL changes since 1.03.000 (and 1.03.001 of course) > If you use a gnubg from a linux distribution, you could open a bug > report there and suggest they apply the change from > http://cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/gnubg/gnubg/import.c?r1=1.199&r2=1.200 > I'd rather tag a new stable release in CVS and have the downstream maintainers use it. If a distro wants to hold back and only implement that one fix then I agree they can create a patch for their environment to cover that specific problem. I'm open to opinions and other options. Just let me know what you think. -- Michael Petch GNU Backgammon Maintainer / Developer OpenPGP FingerPrint=D81C 6A0D 987E 7DA5 3219 6715 466A 2ACE 5CAE 3304 _______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
