+1 from me also. I am willing to help in the first review of the release and dig with you folks through the release stuff. My knowledge is not perfect, but I am absolutely sure the rest of the IPMC will have something to say.
Also I would like to highlight what Ross said: the first release is painful, but the second is already pretty smoothly. To keep it like that it perfectly makes sense to document the release process as good as we can. Here is some first document to read: http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html Basically these are the most important requirements: - all code is covered by CLA/ICLA (it is the case now) - all code reflects the AL 2.0 headers - all dependencies are named with their respective licenses (NOTICE file) - we have LICENSE file - we have signed the release, we provide an md5 (to my knowledge, some variations might apply) - we provide a KEYS file - we release source files first, then optionally binary files - we release on our own hardware. Everything else (like NPM) is optional - we need to vote on the release with +1 or -1. -1 is usually not blocking, but we should take it serious (only code -1 is blocking) - we must not forgot to notify the IPMC, see IPMC rules It's all I can think of right now. Please keep the ball rolling, thanks a lot Parashuram! Regards, Christian On Wed, Jan 21, 2015, at 17:08, Venkata Kiran wrote: > +1 > > Also I think we should document the roadmap on what are the > enhancements/bug > fixes and approximate time frame on when they can be expected. I know > this > will not be 100% but it can be updated as the plan changes.I think this > will > help the existing contributors to focus on few things instead of > scattering > over large set of things. Also this may encourage the new Contributors to > easily step in on the enhancements they wish to have. > > Thanks & Regards, > --Kiran > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 3:56 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Ripple Release > > +1 > > Thank you Parashu. As I said before I am here to help as a mentor. Given > the > status of this podling I believe we will need to go to the IPMC to get > the > necessary binding votes. > > Since this is the first formal release from this project it is likely > that > we will need a very close eye on the details of the legal checklist > (certainly the IPMC will be thorough in this regard). After this first > release subsequent releases should be much easier. > > Ross > > Microsoft Open Technologies, Inc. > A subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation > > -----Original Message----- > From: Parashuram N (MS OPEN TECH) [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 2:18 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [DISCUSS] Ripple Release > > Hi, > > I wanted to start a discuss thread on making an official release for > Ripple. > We would be picking up the latest from the master branch, tag it as a > release candidate (version 0.9.24) and follow the process as in > http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#check-list > > Will this be something that the community would be interested in ? Please > +1, and raise any questions in this [DISCUSS] thread. >
