Jeff Licquia writes... > On Tue, 2005-06-28 at 13:25 -0700, Matt Taggart wrote: > > I think this work around would only be needed for stable, unstable should b > e > > able to do 3.0 on it's own (and probably 2.0 at the same time). > > I should point out that this was the conventional wisdom for woody vs. > sarge at one point. Now we are saying the same thing for sarge vs. > etch. Will we be saying the same thing for etch vs. etch+1? What will > prevent this from happening?
etch releasing in 12 months. Call me crazy but I think it's possible given the improvements in release infrastructure. (although there are still issues being resolved) -- Matt Taggart [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
