On Nov 28, 2018, at 11:12 PM, Abdul Khader <akhader@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Thanks Jaap. But the URL provided in the email was https://www.wireshark.org/download.html[48]
> Should the URL sent in the email announcing the availability be corrected ?
Yes.
I'm not sure why, for that URL, there's a footnote with the same URL. That seems redundant.
The 2.6.4 announcement had the same problem.
Perhaps either
1) the download URL shouldn't have a reference with the same URL
or
2) it should just say "the Wireshark download page", or something such as that, with the reference having the URL
I'm not sure how easy it is to get to the reference with the URL in any mail reader, so maybe the URLs should *all* just be in-line, without a reference section at the end.
For what it's worth, the 2.4.x announcements put the reference tag *before* the URL for the download page, avoiding this particular problem.
> And even if we go to https://www.wireshark.org/download.html it does not have 2.6.5. It shows only 2.6.4
It didn't do so for me; try it again.