Re: Is 1.3.2 stable enough to call it 1.2.2 ?

Stipe Tolj wrote:
> Alexander Malysh wrote:
> 
>> Hello Bruno,
>>
>> 1.3.2 should be good tested and remaining bug's should be fixed first 
>> before
>> we can call it stable (IMO) and cvs version (before 1.3.2) was not tested
>> by too much people, so we should wait a bit...
>>
>> P.S. why not package 1.3.2 for debian and get it more testing?
>>
>> Bruno Rodrigues wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hello all.
>>>
>>> Does anyone have any complain about 1.3.2 in comparison with 1.2.1 ?
>>>
>>> What do you think about releasing 1.3.2 as 1.2.2 stable so I can package
>>> it for Debian and we could have the "latest stable" version in Sarge ?
>>>
>>> Stipe ?
> 
> 
> I'd like to go for the 1.4 stable branch, rather then having this "major 
> step" under 1.2.
> 
> This is historically also been made for 1.3 devel branch.
> 
> So, I'd like to see 1.4.0 stable rolled in about a week, to give people 
> time to identify any remaining open issues and get the issues out of the 
> BTS too.

"All apps have bugs"

I'm seeing two patches from 1.3.2 to HEAD, and they seem fine to me. I'm 
fixing now the double recode bug.

If you don't mind, I'll call it 1.4.0 then.

get back in a few minutes...