On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, Simon Kitching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't understand this at all. People have built against a > snapshot-of-unknown-date mistakenly labelled 1.0.
True. > Building a 1.0.1 based on the 1.0 code won't produce something that > can replace what they built against. I don't think that is what has been suggested. > And building a 1.0.1 based on HEAD won't produce something that can > replace what they built against. So what can replace it? This should be the 1.0.1. See, if people tell you I've built it against 1.0 and others download 1.0 - the real thing, not the jar from the ibiblio repo - the build is going to fail. We need to ensure that our releases are consistent and our full distributions really ought to be the reference point, not what happened to get rsynced to some repository. Stefan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
