On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 16:00 +0200, Uri Shohet wrote:
> The website is probably incorrect about the current version. I guess that's 
> why I took an older version.

It wasn't incorrect.

> Anyway, upgrading to 0-22-1 solved both my problems :-)

0.19.20 was not stable. Instead of stabilizing 0.19.x I chose to move
forward with the automatic status resolution work for which I had a
pending patch for over 2 months, and to merge the Bugzilla 3.x support,
that has been pending one failed test case for about 2 months.

> Thanks Robert and Oliver!
> 
> Uri
> 
> On Wednesday 24 October 2007, Oliver Schäfer wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> > Is the website right with it's current stable version?
> >
> > 0-22-1 is probably the best for Bugzilla 3.0.x support.
> >
> > --
> > Oliver
> >
> > On Oct 24, 2007, at 2:31 , Robert Hudson wrote:
> > > It's the version I'm using, but I'm not using Bugzilla.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > scmbug-users mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://lists.mkgnu.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scmbug-users
> 
> 
> 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

_______________________________________________
scmbug-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.mkgnu.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scmbug-users

Reply via email to