On Mon, 2003-06-30 at 04:04, Frances Coakley wrote:
> Many thanks - that works but now leaves me with a different problem in that 
> index files produced by 2.4 and 2.2.3 seem incompatible - how stable is 2.4 
> to put into a production environment ?

Well, that's always debatable.  But, it should be more stable than
2.2.3.  Best option would be to thoroughly test the features you need to
use.


Testing is especially important on Windows.  The daily Windows build
really doesn't get tested by any of the developers until a problem is
reported.  I normally don't even look at the build logs unless I get an
email from the automated build system.



> On a related note is it possible to specify name for prop file - I can 
> choose index name to be ISO9660 compatible but not it seems the associated 
> property file

That is an interesting problem.  Perhaps we could change the file
extension to something three characters long instead of .prop?  .pro or
something?  I don't suppose the name of the property file really
matters.  A name like "index.pro" is ISO9660 compatible, right?


Bill, any thoughts?

-- 
 David Norris
  http://www.webaugur.com/dave/
  ICQ - 412039