On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 1:52 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 13:55, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: >> Should we hold 1.0.2 for this? > > If releases are a whole bunch of work, then yes. > > However, since this doesn't seem to be a (recent) regression, it would > IMHO be even greater if we had this 1.0.2 and a quick 1.0.3 once this > thing is fixed. >
There was a separate issue in the CHANGES and NEWS that were enough to veto the 1.0.2 artefacts. I'd vote to just wait for this to get sussed out before moving forward with 1.0.2 again. Paul > Cheers, > > Dirkjan >
