LOL - wow, that's really interesting to see - thanks for the information and I think this is a proof that even with a simple typo in the email the outcome can be useful!
Ok, as you all have guessed already, I obviously meant 2.1.11 :) Carsten Antonio Gallardo wrote: > Vadim Gritsenko escribió: >> On Dec 18, 2007, at 11:31 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: >> >>> I can't believe you went to the trouble to list all those Antonio - I >>> was just trying to make a joke! I'm sure Carsten must have meant >>> 2.1.11. >> >> It shows interesting pattern, though: >> >>>> Version 2.1 (August 12 2003) >>>> Version 2.1.1 (September 05 2003) >>>> Version 2.1.2 (September 30 2003) >>>> Version 2.1.3 (November 13 2003) >>>> Version 2.1.4 (February 12 2004) >>>> Version 2.1.5.1 (July 9 2004) >>>> Version 2.1.6 (November 19 2004) >>>> Version 2.1.7 (March 23 2005) >>>> Version 2.1.8 (November 18 2005) >>>> Version 2.1.9 (April 7 2006) >>>> Version 2.1.10 (December 21 2006) >> >> 4 - 3 - 2 - 2 - 1 >> >> And for Cocoon 2.0, sequence was 6 (including betas) - 4 - 1 :) > This spots, that our release manager was more diligent. ;) > > Best Regards, > > Antonio Gallardo. > > -- Carsten Ziegeler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
