Jason R. Mastaler <jason at mastaler.com> wrote: > Thomas Heller <theller at python.net> writes: > > >> It certainly seems reasonable to me to release 2.3.2 fairly quickly. > > > > But not earlier than at least one week after 2.3.2rc1 ;-) > > Well, if you're going to wait that long, I think you might consider > adding some sort of warning to the 2.3.1 download area. My fear is > that some large OS vendor (e.g, Redhat) will pick up 2.3.1 for a > future release. Too late: 2.3.1 is in at least some versions of Debian already -- I'm getting reports on the os.fsync() issue already from my users (it breaks getmail). Could 2.3.1 be revoked or replaced ASAP? "2.3.1b" or similar with only this change would suit me. Charles -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Charles Cazabon <python at discworld.dyndns.org> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.ca/~charlesc/software/ -----------------------------------------------------------------------
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4