Re: Release timestamps for archaic tarballs

[Eric S. R. <es...@th...>]

Daniel J Sebald <dan...@ie...>:
> OK, we're on the same page.  There are all sorts of conditions I could
> imagine having accounted for, but I think at some point its covering corner
> cases that become increasingly unlikely.  We'll have opportunity to review
> how well the authorship has worked out.

Agreed. One of you guys should do an eyeball sanity check after I first
push the repository.  I'll probably do that later today.

There is a sneaky way to force-push a surgically modified repo to
SourceForge, but it relies on having ssh access to the repo
directory. I'll have to check for that feature still being enabled
before I push.

BTW, I now have no fewer than 6 early releases in the repository tail:
1.10A, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, and 3.5.  If any of you can turn up more
ancient versions, now would be a good time for it.
-- 
		<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>

My work is funded by the Internet Civil Engineering Institute: https://icei.org
Please visit their site and donate: the civilization you save might be your own.