Re: Should 3.0.3 be Listed as Stable

--===============0826694943==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f83a34515609504d323e590

--e89a8f83a34515609504d323e590
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

It is actually merely a problem with Xamarin.

We have a series of products based on 2.10, and have not had a chance to
revalidate them all on 3.0, and we do not want our users to get 3.0 by
accident.

We want to change that, just a matter of time.


On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 11:19 PM, Peter Newhook <[email protected]>wrote:

> The download page, http://www.go-mono.com/mono-**downloads/download.html<http://www.go-mono.com/mono-downloads/download.html>,
>  features 2.10.x as 'Stable' and 3.0.3 as 'Beta'. The roadmap (
> http://www.mono-project.com/**Mono_Project_Roadmap<http://www.mono-project.com/Mono_Project_Roadmap>)
> however lists the current release as 2.12 as the current release and
> confusingly points to to the Mono 3.0 release notes. There's also guidance
> that even numbered minor releases are stable, so 3.0 should be considered
> stable.
>
> Is 3.0 considered the proper public release and the documentation is just
> out of date?
> ______________________________**_________________
> Mono-docs-list maillist  -  [email protected].**com<[email protected]>
> http://lists.ximian.com/**mailman/listinfo/mono-docs-**list<http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-docs-list>
>

--e89a8f83a34515609504d323e590
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

It is actually merely a problem with Xamarin.<div><br></div><div>We have a =
series of products based on 2.10, and have not had a chance to revalidate t=
hem all on 3.0, and we do not want our users to get 3.0 by accident.</div>
<div><br></div><div>We want to change that, just a matter of time.</div><di=
v class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sat, Jan 12, =
2013 at 11:19 PM, Peter Newhook <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:pet=
[email protected]" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>&gt;</sp=
an> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">The download page, <a href=3D"http://www.go-=
mono.com/mono-downloads/download.html" target=3D"_blank">http://www.go-mono=
.com/mono-<u></u>downloads/download.html</a>, =A0features 2.10.x as &#39;St=
able&#39; and 3.0.3 as &#39;Beta&#39;. The roadmap (<a href=3D"http://www.m=
ono-project.com/Mono_Project_Roadmap" target=3D"_blank">http://www.mono-pro=
ject.com/<u></u>Mono_Project_Roadmap</a>) however lists the current release=
 as 2.12 as the current release and confusingly points to to the Mono 3.0 r=
elease notes. There&#39;s also guidance that even numbered minor releases a=
re stable, so 3.0 should be considered stable.<br>

<br>
Is 3.0 considered the proper public release and the documentation is just o=
ut of date?<br>
______________________________<u></u>_________________<br>
Mono-docs-list maillist =A0- =A0<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]=
an.com" target=3D"_blank">[email protected].<u></u>com</a><br>
<a href=3D"http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-docs-list" target=
=3D"_blank">http://lists.ximian.com/<u></u>mailman/listinfo/mono-docs-<u></=
u>list</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>

--e89a8f83a34515609504d323e590--

--===============0826694943==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Mono-docs-list maillist  -  [email protected]
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-docs-list

--===============0826694943==--