Bundy wrote: > > Correct. Mozilla .9.9 is released to the public because the public can > download it. > If they don't want it released, don't allow the public to download it. > > Here is the problem, anyone can download .9.9 for windows, and claim it's a > peice of crap and all the Mozilla people will claims it's not an "official" > release. However, when downloading it, and doing a version search, it says > Mozilla .9.9 - not Mozilla .9.9-beta.
By your own admission it does not: it says 0.9.9.2002030514. The date-stamp is something of a clue that this isn't a released version: 0.9.8 just says 0.9.8, not 0.9.8.2002020something. And if you really want to verify that this isn't the released build, try downloading it again today - you'll notice that the number has gone up to 20020306something, because another build has been made since. The file size will also be different. You can download them daily and you'll see that they differ every day, until the final 0.9.9 comes out at which point the 20020xxxxxxx will go away completely (oh, and the build will be in the *release* directory, not the *nightly* directory). As for not letting people download it, that would somewhat defeat the purpose of an open source project, wouldn't it? Being able to get a "work-in-progress" build is vital to open-source debugging and development. There are people *working* on releasing 0.9.9 who rely on those publically available builds, because they're outside the netscape firewall. Oh, and in case you even care, you'll notice that Gerv *wasn't* agreeing with you: he implied pretty clearly that you "don't understand" the release-numbering system. A correction from someone with an @mozilla.org email address ought to be enough for you, oughtn't it? Stuart. -- Stuart Ballard, Programmer FASTNET - Internet Solutions 215.283.2300, ext. 126 www.fast.net
