<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2008/5/7 Steve Holton <<a href="mailto:sph0lt0n@gmail.com">sph0lt0n@gmail.com</a>>:<br><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <div class="gmail_quote"><div>Case in point, it bugs me when the wiki documents features of versions which haven't been released yet, or declares a problem "fixed" because some later, as yet unreleased version no longer shows the problem.<br> </div></div></blockquote><div><br>Well, it's correct to document features of unstable builds; just not to conflate that with a bug being fixed in a stable update to the last official release.  This is why stable branches continue development in parallel with the latest [unstable] trunk.<br> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="gmail_quote"><div>It ain't fixed if, in order to get the fix, you need to "...don't expect it to work, don't expect your system to even work ever again... but thankyou for testing..."</div> </div></blockquote><div><br>Agreed in general.  In specific, our system is built such that you /should/ expect everything to work if you upgrade specific activities to new ones.  New entire builds which are experimental are places where you shouldn't expect anything to work -- if any docs suggest that there is a "fix" which requires installing an unstable build, that should certainly be swiftly removed.<br> <br>SJ<br></div></div>