David Crossley wrote: > Ross Gardler wrote: > > David Crossley wrote: > > >So what to do about the release candidate? > > > > I've not tested RC2 yet, I hope to be able to find time before your > > extended deadline (no promises though). > > > > If you want to build an RC3 I'll test that instead (going to bed now, so > > you have a good few hours to do it). > > > > The problem is, I may be the only one able to test in the time alloted, > > so it may be better to stick with RC2, your call. > > Disrupting the vote at this late stage could be very > detrimental. We may have lost people's attention. > > I grepped through the fresh-site source and see that > the problem only occurs with a link on the body of > the index page and two links on the body of the > linking.html page. These go to the generated > plugins index, which thankfully is the same as > a 0.8 generated index.
See FOR-995. > So my decision is that we will stick with RC2. And then i found a batch of linking errors. These are confined to some top-level docs (e.g. index.xml) and only specific links. If you want to know, then do grep "site:v0.70" index.xml There are some more minor occurrences in three other top-level docs. See FOR-996 A release is probably never perfect. I wonder if many people really use the local site-author docs. We would receive more patches than we do. Drat, i need to make a decision again. ... Stick with RC2. So if you are really concerned, then express that with your vote. -David
