Should 6.8.99.901-1 be marked experimental?

[James R. Phillips]

Hi,

AFAICT there is no release announcement for 6.8.99.901-1, and there are several
bug reports requiring manual intervention or downgrades.  In fact I am
experiencing lockups myself, and had to downgrade.

This being the case (no release announcement + egregious regressions),
shouldn't 6.8.99.901-1 be marked as experimental, so people don't upgrade to it
semi-automatically?

James R. Phillips
cygwin octave/ghostscript maintainer


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://x.cygwin.com/docs/
FAQ:                   http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/