I like that idea. Igor, thoughts? Brian
On Feb 15, 2012, at 9:02 PM, James Peach <jpe...@apache.org> wrote: > On 15/02/2012, at 8:58 PM, Brian Geffon wrote: > >> Because according to zwoop, once the dist has been pushed they aren't >> really sure how to fix it..it's technically released, we just >> haven't publicly announced it. > > then releasing 3.0.4 and quietly forgetting about 3.0.3 seems like the lesser > evil > > J > >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 8:56 PM, James Peach <jpe...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> On 15/02/2012, at 8:55 PM, Brian Geffon wrote: >>> >>>> And never publicly release 3.0.3? >>> >>> Oh, if 3.0.3 hasn't flown the coop yet, then why not fix it there? >>> >>>> >>>> Brian >>>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 8:51 PM, James Peach <jpe...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 15/02/2012, at 8:28 PM, Brian Geffon wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hello Everyone, >>>>>> As some may or may not know, the RC for ATS 3.0.3 has a minor issue in >>>>> that >>>>>> the ts.h generated does not correctly set the minor version or the >>>>> integer >>>>>> version number in ts.h. Do we have any proposals on how to deal with >>>>> this? >>>>>> One issue that immediately comes to mind is that in 3.0.3 we fixed the >>>>>> broken TSFetchUrl declaration, and unfortunately because the version >>>>>> numbers are broken in ts.h applications using the api and TSFetchUrl >>>>> don't >>>>>> have an easy way to determine whether they need to include a forward >>>>>> declaration for TSFetchUrl now. >>>>>> >>>>>> What does everyone think. Suggestions on how to resolve this? >>>>> >>>>> Spin a 3.0.4 that just fixes the version numbers? >>>>> >>>>> J >>>>> >>> >>> >
