On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 15:23 -0500, John Casey wrote: > I'm not too interested in which version number we use; I only suggested > this notation since it's definitely a lot smaller than what we did for > 2.0.1, and what we've got slated for 2.0.2...that, and it's meant to > modify the 2.0.1 release so it'll work. > > 2.0.2 is fine with me. I can push the other stuff off to 2.0.3. > > What about the vote?
+1 for 2.0.2 -- Trygve --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
