Deron Meranda wrote: > Just want some verification because I haven't seen anything > official looking.... > > Is 3.2.9 now considered a bad release because of its memory > leaks, and thus will never be released?
It's not so much that it's a bad release, but rather it didn't make sense to officially release 3.2.9 and then turn around and release 3.2.10 a week later. The leak that will be fixed in 3.2.10 is not new in 3.2.9, only newly discovered. > Hence 3.2.10 will be > the next hopeful stable release after 3.2.8? Basically yes, but if you are already using 3.2.9 there is no harm specific harm. At any rate, I'll roll a 3.2.10 tarball for testing by the list tonight. Jim
