Yes, under the current process, there little reason to have a real "freeze". It's more like a heads-up now.
AFAIC, the codebase should not be considered frozen now, and people can start applying fixes to go into 1.2.1, including the license thing. The only reason we're not starting a vote on the quality of 1.2.0 is because of an ISP glitch. If 1.2.0 dies on the vine, then we can just roll 1.2.1 at any convenient juncture. -Ted. On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:13:38 -0600, Joe Germuska wrote: > At 6:28 PM +0000 2/24/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> Once a release is tagged that's it. We could retag and do 1.2.1, >> however there will probably be other things that need to be >> fixed. The point is to get 1.2.0 out the door and then see about >> making whatever fixes that need to happen. >> > > Well, if it's tagged, then I don't have to wait to commit the > change; there's no need for a freeze, as you can always check out > to the tag and use that to cut the release. No need to wait to > apply the license patches either. (I will wait, however, until I'm > sure other people see it the way I do.) > > Of course, it's possible to move CVS tags -- I assume you're just > saying that you think that that's procedurally wrong? I'm not sure > I agree, but I don't feel very strongly about it either. In fact, > I'd much rather see 1.2.0 come out, with as few delays as possible. > > Joe --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
