X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
From: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
Message-Id: <10112241545.AA16112@clio.rice.edu>
Subject: Re: Where should 2.03 updates be (in 2.03u and 2.04?) [was Re: v2.03 update status]
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 09:45:27 -0600 (CST)
In-Reply-To: <3C26D0D4.24B38E6D@is.elta.co.il> from "Eli Zaretskii" at Dec 24, 2001 08:53:08 AM
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> > > It seems kb.info hasn't been updated with what fixes have been
> > > incorporated.
> > 
> > Should 2.03 refresh items be included separately in the 2.04 documents 
> > when it's released (they are currently in the wc204)?
> 
> The refresh release is a branch in the development tree, and as such,
> its changes don't have to (and mostly won't) appear in 2.04.
> 
> In other words, just add the changes in the refresh to wc203.txi, and
> commit those changes to the branch, but don't make any changes on the
> trunk.  IMHO, of course.

This is the simplest and fastest thing to do also.  If noone objects,
I'll do this - add the changes to the branch version of wc203.txi (with 
the typos fixed from cvs, I hadn't see that one either...).  I'll put 
the refresh items at the top with a refresh heading.