0.93 and 1.0

[Greg Louis]

On 20041018 (Mon) at 1814:58 +0200, Matthias Andree wrote:
> 
> I haven't delved into the algorithmic issues, I don't know anything
> about the effective size factor other than it exists. If somebody else,
> particularly you, Greg, says it needs testing, I'm willing to give it
> testing.

It's a simple enough bit of code, and I doubt anyone can make it break
(famous last words), but my point is that since a lot of people, like
yourself, haven't even looked into trying it yet, it's not really been
_in_use_ for a long time.  I mean, look how long Pentium IIs were
around before anybody discovered the f00f bug.

> I think we'll call it ready when it is ready, and I'd think
> we'd give it at least 6 weeks of 1.0-test or 1.0.0-release candidates,
> not counting the two weeks "between the years" as we say in Germany
> (Christmas Eve til Epiphany).

Sounds good to me.

> I'd suggest that we hold off on the version bump until the TXN branch is
> merged back on the trunk.

I'd like to see an 0.93 with that, when you guys have the time.

Speaking of having the time, there's a bug in bogotune's -E option: if
one does a run with -v and -E, odd ESF values are printed during the
scans but the "top ten" rightly say 1.0 for both.  I haven't looked into
this (busy and sick together) but will do so, David, if you too are
otherwise occupied -- it may take a week or two for me.

-- 
| G r e g  L o u i s         | gpg public key: 0x400B1AA86D9E3E64 |
|  http://www.bgl.nu/~glouis |   (on my website or any keyserver) |
|  http://wecanstopspam.org in signatures helps fight junk email. |