# Wrong git tag in 3.6.3 release tarball **URL:** \ **Category:** GNU Radio\ **Created:** [January 22, 2013, 11:06am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/wrong-git-tag-in-3-6-3-release-tarball/225660 "2013-01-22T11:06:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![aris](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/258eb7/32.png) [@aris](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/aris)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2013, 11:06am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/wrong-git-tag-in-3-6-3-release-tarball/225660/1 "2013-01-22T11:06:55Z")
It seems that 3.6.3 release tarball has been prepared from git tag 3.6.4git :\ ---
**Author:** ![aramisbear](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/f17d59/32.png) [@aramisbear](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/aramisbear)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2013, 6:40pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/wrong-git-tag-in-3-6-3-release-tarball/225660/2 "2013-01-22T18:40:15Z")
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 2:05 AM, Barry J. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > It seems that 3.6.3 release tarball has been prepared from git tag > 3.6.4git :\ Indeed it has, thanks for catching this. Fortunately, there is no difference in functionality, other than the change in the version string. I’ll re-issue the tarball file on [gnuradio.org](http://gnuradio.org). Thanks again, Johnathan ---
**Author:** ![aramisbear](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/f17d59/32.png) [@aramisbear](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/aramisbear)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2013, 6:56pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/wrong-git-tag-in-3-6-3-release-tarball/225660/3 "2013-01-22T18:56:37Z")
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Richard F. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > It should be noted, that it is generally bad to make a new tarball with > exactly the same name as it confuses people. I added gnuradio 3.6.3 in > gentoo and all of the users downloaded the package from your site and > the gentoo mirrors picked up the package. Now if the user gets it from > the mirrors or your website it would be different. > > It would be best to avoid two different tarballs with different > checksums and the same name. Can we maybe call this 3.6.3.1? Ok, fair enough. We’ve had a few minor bug fixes along the maint branch since the release, and we do have a provision to make releases with that fourth digit from this branch, so I think the most straightforward thing to do would be to tag and release a 3.6.3.1. I’ve got a couple more bug fix branches to merge in first. Johnathan ---
**Author:** ![aramisbear](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/f17d59/32.png) [@aramisbear](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/aramisbear)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2013, 6:48pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/wrong-git-tag-in-3-6-3-release-tarball/225660/4 "2013-01-22T18:48:26Z")
On 01/22/2013 12:38 PM, Johnathan C. wrote: > in the version string. > > I’ll re-issue the tarball file on [gnuradio.org](http://gnuradio.org). It should be noted, that it is generally bad to make a new tarball with exactly the same name as it confuses people. I added gnuradio 3.6.3 in gentoo and all of the users downloaded the package from your site and the gentoo mirrors picked up the package. Now if the user gets it from the mirrors or your website it would be different. It would be best to avoid two different tarballs with different checksums and the same name. Can we maybe call this 3.6.3.1? Thanks, Zero