[Moin-user] Re: Dumb "attachment:" question

[Thomas Waldmann]

>
>
>>Strange. But 1.0 is stone-age-old meanwhile.
>>    
>>
>I'm a bit curious about this statement.  As far as I can tell from
>sourceforge, 1.0 is still the latest "release".
>
Yes. Sad, but true.

>Does the project plan
>any further "release"es, or is it all from bleeding-edge CVS now.
>
The *plan* is there for long. And the release is long overdue.

The problem is that only Juergen can do SF moin releases - and he is 
currently buried in work within his daytime job.

If I wouldn't have CVS access at least, there maybe would have been NO 
changes at all in the last 6 months. But luckily, I have and so I am 
committing (other people's and own) fixes and changes to CVS - as long 
as they don't risk the possibility of doing a release at any time.

Therefore, latest CVS is NOT bleeding-edge currently - I host multiple 
wikis and they run on somewhat like "current CVS + misc local changes" 
and there are no major problems

>say above, I'm not planning on changing anything until I have to for some
>reason or other, but I am curious.
>
The main reasons to look at cvs nightly snapshot are bugfixes, ACLs and 
some other features you find in CHANGES.

Thomas