No objections to that. For the record some of these may have been instances where we had done a full release, realised that there was some corrigible error (in the build/release process), and then manually or otherwise did a re-release without changing the
actual date of release. That is, we did the release, announced it, noticed an important error (like the non-English pages having not generated properly) and then silently fixed it without mentioning it publicly. ;-) There were also instances where stumbling
blocks in the release meant that it went over midnight in the timezone where the build was happening. Not saying we shouldn't update the webpages
to match the XML reality, just explaining.
(Now off strike, but working to contract.)
Many thanks,
James
--
Dr James Cummings, James.Cummings@newcastle.ac.uk
Senior Lecturer in Late-Medieval Literature and Digital Humanities
School of English, Newcastle University
From: Tei-council <tei-council-bounces@lists.tei-c.org> on behalf of Peter Stadler <stadler@edirom.de>
Sent: 29 November 2019 06:39
To: TEI Council <tei-council@lists.tei-c.org>
Subject: [Tei-council] release dates, some findings
for the record:
While working through the Guidelines releases for the Zenodo ingest I discovered and fixed some inconsistencies regarding release dates at [1]. A few dates differed from what is mentioned in the respective release notes, so I fixed it to match
the release notes. Lastly, one release note has the wrong date [2] which I already fixed in the xml [3]. I propose to adjust the date in the html version in the vault, as well, which I’ll do as soon as I get access to the vault.
Best
Peter