From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Jul 16 12:10:03 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA25581
          for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 16 Jul 1996 12:10:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rover.village.org (rover.village.org [204.144.255.49])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA25537
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Tue, 16 Jul 1996 12:09:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rover.village.org (8.7.5/8.6.6) with SMTP id NAA15523; Tue, 16 Jul 1996 13:08:14 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <199607161908.NAA15523@rover.village.org>
To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Subject: Re: I'm re-rolling the 2.1.5 release. 
Cc: jack <jacko@xtalwind.net>, hackers@FreeBSD.org
In-reply-to: Your message of Tue, 16 Jul 1996 12:04:09 PDT
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 1996 13:08:14 -0600
From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org>
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

: Not unless you want to pay for the cost of reprinting 10,000
: CD backliners and covers. :-)

Hmmm, in that case 2.1.5 is fine :-).  

It is common practice in other parts of the industry to slip in "nit"
releases (releases that differ only in the forth digit) into pre
existing release packaging.  At least it was for a certain database
manufacturer that we got stuff from. :-).

However, since the window for confusion is small, it is likely best to
re-roll the silly thing and pretend the first one never happened.

Warner