<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 8/27/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Carl Fongheiser</b> <<a href="mailto:carlfongheiser@gmail.com">carlfongheiser@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<span class="q">On 8/27/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">David Brodbeck</b> <<a href="mailto:gull@gull.us" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">gull@gull.us</a>> wrote:</span><div><span class="q">
<span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>On Aug 27, 2007, at 12:26 PM, Steve MacLaren wrote:<br>> Is there a "protocol change" in .20.2 that will prevent an OS X .20-<br>> fixes frontend from working with a .20.2 backend?<br>><br><br>Yes. The database schema changed.
</blockquote></span><div><br><br>No, it hasn't. The schema version is still 1160. dbcheck.cpp looks for a setting to see if the program ID's have been fixed, but that's not a breaking change to the DB schema.
<br></div>
<br>Unless the 0.20-fixes frontend is *very* old, it'll work just fine with a 0.20.2 backend. <br><br>Carl Fongheiser<br></div><br></blockquote></div>
Well, looks like I won't have to worry too much about how this debate turns out. I will soon be downloading the Universal .20.2 build from the sniderpad. Thanks David!<br><br>Oh, and the Ambien story was funny. Strange, but funny...
<br>