[Asterisk-Users] Is there a Caller ID issue in the latest CVSStable

[Rich Adamson]

> I'm confused about the part that you can check out a stable version 
> after 1.0.5.
> 
> IMHO if you check out what is tagged as 1.0.5 at any time then you 
> should get exactly what is in the 1.0.5 tarball. If you check out head 
> then you should get all of the latest stuff in CVS which may or may not 
> build cleanly (and may segfault or whatever). If you could check out 
> 1.0.6-rc1 (release candidate 1) or something like that you would get 
> everything after 1.0.5 that may or may not build properly but is no 
> longer a moving target (features have been frozen).
> 
> It just doesn't make sense to me that there would be a 1.0.5 that has 
> changed since 1.0.5 was released unless you tag it 1.0.5.1 (or 
> something). I mean, why even bother trying to constantly maintain a new 
> stable version without having a formal release? 1.0.5 is what it is 
> with whatever bugs it came with upon release.
> 
> Obviously, just my opinion on "How things should work!". ;-)

We probably need Russel to chime in on how it really works. If you
watch the -cvs list, Russel's application of fixes always says v1.0;
I've not seen any v1.0.5 or whatever.

>From that I'd have to suggest that cvs stable is the current v1.0.5
and fixes are continuously applied to it until its time to call
it v1.0.6 (or whatever). A snap shot of v1.0.5 is then made into
tarballs, etc.