On Thursday 09 October 2003 15:35, Chris Carlin wrote: > To clarify, this is only in reference to the unstable branch. > > Problems: > Developers know when they've [potentially] fixed something that was > horribly broken. They need to be able to suggest an immediate update, > especially where the bug might have, say, compromised anonymity. > > Developers will have an opinion on when a build needs to be come more > mainstream for testing purposes, and for the sake of development they > need to be able to express this to users. > > Users won't necessarily know if a build is good or not. Just because > it feels bad doesn't mean it actually is, external considerations > might be involved. > > I'd be perfectly happy with the font page saying > Build:6222 Latest:6223 Latest Important: 6223
I'm not a developer, but the message from them on IRC is clear enough: "Topic for #freenet: Everyone upgrade to 5028 or 6226 | Unstable branch undergoing major debugging, please update frequently" Translated, that means: Build:6*** Latest:6226 Latest Important: 6226 I've been using 6226 overnight. It isn't perfect, and seems to need restarting after a few hours, but it's a great deal better than any other recent version. -- Richard Lamont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> OpenPGP Key ID: 5ABEC9C3 http://www.stonix.demon.co.uk/key.txt Fingerprint: 9DEE 7113 DF02 A516 404C 22AC 1FF6 185D 5ABE C9C3 _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
