Yep -- This was my intent also.
ms
On Jan 31, 2008, at 7:57 AM, Kieran Kelleher wrote:
> +1.
>
> And let's never advertize superunstable on the wiki .... the
> existence of superunstable should be only known by readers of the
> mailing list ... so that they know what the deal is with it....
> besides those are the ones who are most likely to want to experiment
> anyway
>
> On Jan 29, 2008, at 1:29 PM, Mike Schrag wrote:
>
>>
>>> I think I agree with David on this. Though I'd vote to add a
>>> 'Legacy' for the current 4118 build and make a snapshot before the
>>> class-path changes for the 'Release'
>>>
>>> It'd be really nice if the labels for the build actually mean
>>> something rather than 'stable' == 'old and untouched', 'nightly'
>>> == 'use this one if you want bug fixes and new features'.
>> The intent is that this is a relatively short term thing. Once
>> this classpath stuff is stable, "stable" turns into this build,
>> nightly goes back to being "unstable" and this new thing goes away
>> complete. I can't rename the existing locations because people have
>> update sites pointing to them and it will only cause MORE
>> confusion. The intent here is that if you don't know any better,
>> you continue to point to the update site you've been pointing to
>> and nothing changes for you (you just top getting updates).
>>
>> ms
>>
>>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Thu Jan 31 2008 - 09:13:38 EST