From: Paul Louden <paulthenerd_at_gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 02:48:24 -0600

When 2.5.1 was originally presented, it was presented as "2.5 with the
charging issue fixed," was how I meant the "supposed."

And by "the forums" I meant "users host their own builds where they can, and
keep updates restricted to the unsupported section of the forum."

I just don't feel it's appropriate any more that it's hosted in the wiki as
it's moved from "a basic bugfix on 2.5" to a full "unsupported build" and as
well still maintains the 2.5.1 misnomor which is misleading even if it does
say clearly that it's private and unsupported, as at this point it's no
longer just a bugfix but a modification.

On 1/5/07, Tom Cole <tcole_at_xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 5 Jan 2007 01:39:13 -0600, "Paul Louden" <paulthenerd_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >My point is that we have a specific place for Unsupported Builds.
>
> I'm not aware of any specific place for unsupported builds. Looking on
> the forum, they seem to be hosted all over the place.
> >
> >The whole point of the 2.5.1 was that it was supposed to offer the exact
> >reliability of 2.5 with the small changes that 2.5 left out. <snip>
>
> No, 2.5.1 was not _supposed_ to do anything. It's completely unofficial.
> The wiki page makes that quite clear. That was a condition of the
> official developers who kindly allowed me to use the wiki.
>
> To repeat, there has been no input from the Rockbox developers on the
> content of 2.5.1 whatsoever. There is no official endorsement at all for
> this release.
>
> Archos users are completely free to ignore this download as they please,
> and owners of other machines will not be interested.
>
> I hope this clears up any confusion.
>
>
Received on 2007-01-05