On Jan 9, 2008, at 9:21 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Jan 9, 2008, at 9:00 AM, Nick Kew wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 08:56:58 -0500
Jim Jagielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
BTW: Shouldn't we drop 2.2.7 entirely from the CHANGES file and
put all
changes since 2.2.6 under 2.2.8?
No, since there *was* a 2.2.7... it just wasn't released.
Just as there *was* a 2.2.5.
Ohhh... I see what he's asking.... my mistake...
In any case, one sees that we've done it both ways.
Consider 2.2.5 and 2.2.1. Same with the 2.0.x
ones as well...
Looking back, I prefer keeping the "old" way, where
once we've tagged, we have a corresponding entry
in CHANGES... My intent is to keep the 2.2.7,
2.0.62 and 1.3.40 lines in CHANGES.
