From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Sat Aug 7 05:17:53 2010 Message-ID: <4C5D2457.3070503@abbuc.de> Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2010 11:16:07 +0200 From: Stefan Niestegge User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.11) Gecko/20100713 Thunderbird/3.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mint@lists.fishpool.fi Subject: Re: [MiNT] 1.17 Release - Call for documentation updates ! References: <1281170517.6125.3.camel@jetpack.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-to: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: beetle@abbuc.de Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-Id: X-List-ID: List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: Am 07.08.2010 10:47, schrieb Miro Kropacek: >> I'll be releasing tomorrow night (BST) around 10pm, so I'll be looking >> at how Frank built the 1.16.x releases and create a similar tarball. >> > Huh? Wouldn't be better to provide RC for all parts (kernel, xaaes, > docs, ...) let it test for a week, gain feedback and THEN make a > release? This is way too unusual. What do you do if nobody will update > that documentation? Release anyway? > > Not that i am qualified in any way, but i vote for a RC testing week, too. Greetings, Stefan