Thanks Brent! I've built a package and will do some testing, then send it out by Monday if all seems good.
Tim > On Feb 13, 2015, at 6:54 AM, Brent Lintner <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hey Tim, > > No worries at all! I am definitely not one to talk for replies. ;-) > > I have merged your PR and tagged 0.9.25. Sorry for any delay. I was not > anywhere near my computer yesterday afternoon onward. :-( > >> On Tue Feb 10 2015 at 21:41:58 Tim Barham <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Thanks for the response, Brent, and sorry for my tardiness getting back to >> you - I've been travelling (return from time in Redmond back to my home in >> Brisbane, Australia), followed by jetlag followed by getting sick :). But >> anyways... I'm back on this now. >> >> I was looking into getting a couple of additional fixes into this release, >> but in the end decided the priority was to get the release out. I am about >> to send out a PR with the following changes: >> >> 1. Updated version in package.json to 0.9.25 >> 2. Listed changes in CHANGELOG.md. >> >> If you accept this PR, would you then be able to apply the "0.9.25" tag? >> Then I'll be able to build an up-to-date package. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Tim >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Brent Lintner [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2015 11:23 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Ripple Release >> >> Hey Tim, >> >> Sorry for my haphazard participation and delayed reply. Thanks for the PR >> for the header file updates! Your help is greatly appreciated and welcome. >> :-D >> >>>> I'm working on Windows (surprise :) ), and hit some issues building >> Ripple >> >> I'm personally sorry that Windows support is not on par. Glad you can get >> it working with a Cygwin terminal. It has been something that some have >> contributed to, but, alas, we were naughty (back in the day) and did not >> give Windows as much love as it needed/deserved. :-( >> >> To somewhat answer your questions: >> >>>> 1. Do we need to update the version number before doing a release? If >> so, to what (currently 0.9.24)? >> >> I'd say, yes. Even though small (code) changes have happened, there has >> not been a tagged unofficial "release" that encompasses those contributions. >> (IMO: as long as it is http://semver.org based, all good!). >> >>>> 2. I've signed the package, but my PGP certificate has not been >> authenticated by anyone in the Apache "web of trust", so I may need to >> sort that out. >> >> It seems Ross already helping with the PGP issue (sorry for my lack of >> insight..) >> >>>> 3. Is there somewhere I can put the package for people to take a look >> at? >> >> Not too sure myself, there. I admit I am a bit of rogue when it comes to >> more ASF specific things. ;-) My suggestion of Dropbox or something is >> probably not cool, heh. Hopefully someone else can give an idea of where to >> host the package. I want to say there is a way to host files via our >> personal apache accounts... >> >> All the best, >> >> On Fri Jan 30 2015 at 18:43:11 Tim Barham <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Thanks Ross! >>> >>> Tim >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) [mailto:[email protected]] >>> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 9:28 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Ripple Release >>> >>> Hi Tim, >>> >>> Thanks for stepping up. As you probably know Ripple is not a very >>> active project right now. If there is no take up from the community >>> then the projects mentors will step up to help you get your work done. >>> For now - keep it up, and thnks. >>> >>> Ross >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Tim Barham [mailto:[email protected]] >>> Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2015 4:11 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Ripple Release >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> First I would like to introduce myself - my name is Tim Barham, and >>> I'm on the Visual Studio team at Microsoft. I've been doing some work >>> on Cordova, and am currently working to help get a release of Ripple >>> out. However, I'm completely new to the process, so would certainly >> appreciate any tips! >>> >>> First steps for me have been to get a package put together. I'm >>> working on Windows (surprise :) ), and hit some issues building Ripple >>> (similar to that recently described by Venkata Kiran). However, I was >>> able to get the build working by running it in a Cygwin terminal. >>> >>> I've created a package by leveraging some of the tools that have been >>> created for Cordova (in cordova-coho). But I have a few questions: >>> >>> 1. Do we need to update the version number before doing a release? If >>> so, to what (currently 0.9.24)? >>> 2. I've signed the package, but my PGP certificate has not been >>> authenticated by anyone in the Apache "web of trust", so I may need to >>> sort that out. >>> 3. Is there somewhere I can put the package for people to take a look at? >>> 4. I found some source files that look to me like that should have the >>> Apache 2.0 headers but don't. Should I just make the changes and open >>> a pull request? Here are the files: >>> >>> lib/server/emulate/cordovaProject.js >>> lib/server/emulate/static.js >>> lib/client/ui/plugins/about-dialog/dialog.html >>> lib/client/ui/plugins/confirm-dialog/dialog.html >>> lib/client/ui/plugins/exec-dialog/dialog.html >>> lib/client/ui/plugins/settings-dialog/dialog.html >>> >>> I'm working my way through the relevant Apache documents, and I'm sure >>> I'll have more questions, but in the meantime any help would be >>> greatly appreciated. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Tim >>> >>> On 1/21/15, 1:15 PM, "Parashuram N (MS OPEN TECH)" >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks Christian. >>>> >>>> Kiran, I agree with you about the plan. We should definitely discuss >>>> the future plans. There have also been some discussions on the >>>> Cordova mailing list about how Ripple could be leverage better, and >>>> some prototypes have been built. We should look at working on the >>>> plan separately from this DISCUSS thread. >>>> >>>> Community, does anyone have opinions on how best to work on a >>>> roadmap, and do you guys think a roadmap is required? >>>> >>>> On 1/21/15, 12:18 PM, "Christian Grobmeier" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>>> >>>>> +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-li >>>>>> st >>>>>> >>>>>> Will this be something that the community would be interested in ? >>>>>> Please >>>>>> +1, and raise any questions in this [DISCUSS] thread. >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>
