I'd like give my 2 cents here. Understanding the need to conserve and focus time and resources for the people writing FB, I would consider the following options reasonable...either:

1) Pull back a release that has known data corruption issues and revert to the previous "no known data corruption issues" release as the latest official stable release.

or

2) Put out a sign or note in the download page and in the release notes of the latest stable version "in flashing, bold, red letters" that that an issue has been found that potentially causes data corruption and that a fix is available in the latest build and is to be expected to be included in the next stable release. Then if possible trim down the scope of the next release so the bug fix gets released sooner rather than later. If a high-priority email can also be sent out, maybe in this mailing list, that a data corruption issue has been found then better also.

Regards,

Rommel

--- In Firebird-general@yahoogroups.com, Lester Caine <lester@...> wrote:
>
> Roger Vellacott wrote:
> > The snapshot build 1 week after the official release of 2.1.2 works
> > fine. There is no reason to go back to previous releases. My point is
> > that there ought to be a mechanism for making this the version that
> > everyone downloads and uses.
>
> I think this is a case where a 2.1.2a should have been put out to fix
> the 'regression', but I can understand that stuff was probably pushed
> into the code base as soon as 2.1.2 was released, so that actually
> producing a 2a was perhaps not practical then?
>
> SO perhaps at this stage it is appropriate to run 2.1.3 a little earlier
> than was originally planned?
>
> --
> Lester Caine - G8HFL
> -----------------------------
> Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
> L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
> EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
> Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
> Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php
>