Mailing-List: contact dev-help@flex.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@flex.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of aharui@adobe.com designates
 64.18.1.27 as permitted sender)
From: Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com>
To: "dev@flex.apache.org" <dev@flex.apache.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 23:35:55 -0700
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Flex SDK Installer 2.7 Release - RC1
Thread-Topic: [DISCUSS] Apache Flex SDK Installer 2.7 Release - RC1
Thread-Index: Ac7PuiHIW1pKASuLSqaTDGwHolxxoA==
Message-ID: <CE8CBC3F.FB4A%aharui@adobe.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CACK5iZfgY7FUez3xFgTkW1U1UPLrC7cD+Ai=wKci5-8OXRLA1Q@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.6.130613
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0

IMO, if the source package is the same, a new vote is not needed.

On 10/22/13 11:31 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bigosmallm@gmail.com> wrote:

>Weird.  I was able to reproduce the problem on my machine.  But not in my
>IDE.  So, I recreated the binaries.  Now the problem is gone.  My best
>guess is that I built the windows binary with a stale copy of the
>codebase.
>
>Should I make a new RC2 and put up a new vote.  Or should I update RC1
>with
>the new binaries and ask folks to re-test?
>
>Anyone has a preference?
>
>Thanks,
>Om
>
>
>On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 5:38 AM, piotr.zarzycki
><piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Thanks Maurice. Now I've got correct version osmf. :)
>>
>>
>>
>> -----
>> Flex/Air developer open to new job offers and challenges.
>> piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>>=20
>>http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Apache-Flex-
>>SDK-Installer-2-7-Release-RC1-tp31365p31394.html
>> Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at
>>Nabble.com.
>>