Zsh Mailing List Archive Messages sorted by: Reverse Date, Date, Thread, Author

Re: Is this a bug for zsh 4.2.3?

X-seq: zsh-workers 20740
From: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Is this a bug for zsh 4.2.3?
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 16:51:15 +0000
In-reply-to: <200501241052.j0OAqY3S007966@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
References: <16883.11714.845975.423895@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1050123064401.ZM16256@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200501241052.j0OAqY3S007966@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

[moved to -workers]

On Jan 24, 10:52am, Peter Stephenson wrote:
} Subject: Re: Is this a bug for zsh 4.2.3?
}
} Bart Schaefer wrote:
} > It's a pretty
} > serious bug, one that probably warrants a 4.2.4.
} 
} I don't have the energy, myself...

Hrm.  I don't have much either, I'm in the midst of an unpleasant chest
cold.  What's involved nowadays?  If, for example, I set up a patches
branch in CVS, can you make tarfiles to put wherever?  (Or are we now
trying to avoid having a patches branch?)

Though it would be nice to get the Cygwin patches for the configure
scripts (mentioned by someone last week) in there as well.

Meanwhile, what's the scheme nowadays for version numbering the dev
versions in CVS?  It's presently 4.2.3-dev-1, but it seems like it
should be either 4.3.0-dev-1 or 4.2.4-dev-1.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Is this a bug for zsh 4.2.3?
  - From: Peter Stephenson

Messages sorted by: Reverse Date, Date, Thread, Author