Hi, On 10/3/07, Esteban Franqueiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Oh, bugger... Good catch, though! I'll fix the header and > > reroll the release candidate (it'll be 1.3.3) later today. > >[...] > > Sorry if the questions sounds silly, but why can't you change the header > and keep the release in 1.3.2?
To avoid confusion like "is this the 1.3.2 version before or after the header change". We had a similar last minute blocker with the 1.2 release, that sparked some discussion on whether it's better to just patch the release candidate and keep the version number, or skip to the next version. The consensus was that using the next version number is better, and so the first 1.2 release was actually labelled 1.2.1. BR, Jukka Zitting
