>How about we wait until we have the update system working again and >we're happy with a newly generated rules tarball. At that point we cut > >3.3.2-rc2 for more testing.
The code works with existing rules and sa-update is designed to separate the rules from code. I am negative on waiting for a release just because rules as long as we have a working tar we can release that is reasonably recent. >PLEASE allow it to be policy to never reuse a version name and number >ever again. Numbers are cheap. We can use as many as we want. > >Furthermore, I hope that we can have a final rc which is really meant >to >be a release candidate. If we vote to release that, then it gets recut > >as the actual 3.3.2 with zero code changes. This completely eliminates > >our confusing past practice of reusing numbers like last year's "Oops, >this is the real 3.3.1, not that previous tarball of the same name!" I am 100% behind this. There was consensus to create the rc1 and rc1 was released. At worst the next versions must be rc1-build2. Regards,KAM
