I don't recall why - it was a while back :) Yes, I think 2.1.0-rc1 would make sense, once we fix the /bin directory issue.
On 11/12/17, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 12 November 2017 at 13:53, Scott Deboy <scott.de...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> That's right -forgot we rev'd to 2.1 internally (info.plist, release >> notes, couple other places). >> > > Any particular reason? > > >> Would it be easiest to release the new version as 2.1.0.0 instead of >> 2.0.0-rc1? Otherwise I could downgrade 2.1 refs, we never had an >> official release with that rev. >> > > I could re-roll as 2.1.0-rc1 (or rc2?). I chose 2.0.0 since there's no tags > or releases for any 2.x release at all, so it seemed like a logical > starting point. > > And thanks for testing! We should be able to clean up for a proper 2.x > release. :) > > -- > Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >
