@Matthias, can you take care of the Continuum fix? Wendy, the version went backwards because we used to have two forks - 1.0.x and 1.2.x. Both were at 1.y.2 - so we had 1.0.2 and 1.2.2. I realized that the 1.2 branch was actually kinda pointless, and that we only needed one branch. It made more sense to call that next release 1.0.3 than 1.2.3. But - the codeline actually was from the old 1.2 branch.
So, wacky, but intentional. -- Adam On 9/7/07, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 9/7/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Author: awiner > > Date: Fri Sep 7 17:47:54 2007 > > New Revision: 573765 > > > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=573765&view=rev > > Log: > > Update version number and SCM info > > These need to be deleted and re-added in Continuum, it's trying to > 'svn up' the old location. > > http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/groupSummary.action > > Why did the version number go backwards? > > -- > Wendy >
