Addressing MC stagnation.

[Pavel Roskin]

Hi, Leonard!

On Mon, 2005-05-23 at 21:41 +0200, Leonard den Ottolander wrote:
> ?? Aren't you saying what I'm saying? MC_4_6_1_PRE should become
> mc-4.6.1 and HEAD should be used for the release of 4.7 (the viewer code
> is not well tested so I believe it shouldn't be used for 4.6.1). Where
> do we disagree?

I misunderstood you as saying we should use MC_4_6_1_PRE branch for 5.0
and further releases.

-- 
Regards,
Pavel Roskin