The vote has now closed with the following results: Positive binding votes: 4 Christian Grobmeier Ross Gardler Daniel Gruno Justin Mclean
(for votes that were sent to [email protected] and not [email protected], see thread at [1]). Positive non-binding votes: 3 Tim Barham Ilya Buziuk Brent Lintner No negative votes. The vote has passed. I will publish to dist and npm. I will also look into updating the website to announce this release. 1. http://markmail.org/thread/h7pwrlvoousj6x2q -----Original Message----- From: Ross Gardler [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2015 8:54 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [RESULT] [VOTE] Ripple release 0.9.32 You are correct. Thank you for doing the CC, you made my promise good ;-) I've posted a "hurry up" to the IPMC, don't hesitate to ping that thread or me if we don't get action in a day or so. Sent from my Windows Phone ________________________________ From: Tim Barham<mailto:[email protected]> Sent: 8/22/2015 3:46 PM To: <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Ripple release 0.9.32 Ok, thanks (btw I did cc general@... in the original vote email, which I thought was what they requested?) Sent from my phone > On Aug 23, 2015, at 4:54 AM, Ross Gardler <[email protected]> wrote: > > Let me go it. The IPMC requested I confirm to a different interpretation of > the process last time. Due to the timing of this vote (I was at > conferences/traveling) I failed to do that (visually notify IPMC when course > is called). > > I'll go and own up and get the necessary course from the IPMC. > > Sent from my Windows Phone > ________________________________ > From: Tim Barham<mailto:[email protected]> > Sent: 8/22/2015 9:07 AM > To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: [RESULT] [VOTE] Ripple release 0.9.32 > > Vote results are: > > IPMC votes: 2 > Christian Grobmeier > Ross Gardler > > PPMC votes: 3 > Tim Barham > Ilya Buziuk > Brent Lintner > > Thanks all! We just need one more IPMC vote - will you forward this to the > incubator, Ross, or should I just do it? > > Tim > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ross Gardler [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, August 21, 2015 2:29 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [VOTE] Ripple release 0.9.32 > > +1 > > Sent from my Windows Phone > ________________________________ > From: Christian Grobmeier<mailto:[email protected]> > Sent: 8/17/2015 2:33 AM > To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Ripple release 0.9.32 > > Thanks Tim, makes sense. I missed we have moved to SHA1. > > I looked into the release and it looks fine for me. > > +1! > > >> On Mon, Aug 17, 2015, at 11:01, Tim Barham wrote: >> Hah, good question :) ... It's an SHA-1, so... >> >> gpg --print-md SHA1 ripple-emulator-0.9.32-incubating.tgz >> >> For previous releases I had used a 512 bit SHA-2 (which is what "gpg >> --print-md SHA512" gives you), but since Bertrand (Delacretaz) requested >> we include an SHA-1 in our vote emails, and all the Apache projects I >> checked (other than Cordova) were using SHA-1 not 512 bit SHA-2, and it's >> a lot easier to quickly check visually (because it's shorter), while >> still providing very good security, it seemed like it would be the >> simplest thing to do to generate an SHA-1 file, and include the same hash >> in the vote emails. >> >> Tim >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Christian Grobmeier [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 5:35 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Ripple release 0.9.32 >> >> Sorry to ask, but how do you create that SHA? >> >> gpg --print-md SHA512 ripple-emulator-0.9.32-incubating.tgz >> ripple-emulator-0.9.32-incubating.tgz: 00629F87 82450176 C3F55E23 >> 5968B7A5 >> ABFABD9D 2189D424 2C4B4A67 >> 3D4681C5 >> 7F1020B8 F9822F1D 7A3FFB50 >> AFEA5ACF >> EBEBBEF8 1EBCED9C 3E882723 >> D5B39096 >> >> But: >> >> cat ripple-emulator-0.9.32-incubating.tgz.sha1 >> 63a997594e4f08df8d48a644962b47bee4efd91e >> *ripple-emulator-0.9.32-incubating.tgz >> >> Thanks! >> >> Christian >> -- >> Christian Grobmeier >> >> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.grobmeier.de&data=01%7c01%7cTBARHAM%40064d.mgd.microsoft.com%7cfefd12b0ba464c7b8a9608d2a6d65cda%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=ueuVV3LT96t1VTFAdegfisybhvJ4By1GkSfGN44rnDw%3d >> >> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.timeandbill.de&data=01%7c01%7cTBARHAM%40064d.mgd.microsoft.com%7cfefd12b0ba464c7b8a9608d2a6d65cda%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=XDB4aY4X7dPdy%2f%2bl1JwO0jbzCFWgyoi9eHluIZKbIrA%3d >> >>> On Mon, Aug 17, 2015, at 07:48, Tim Barham wrote: >>> [Since 0.9.31 was a bust because of a regression, here is another >>> release that includes a fix for that regression (and a couple of other >>> minor fixes)] >>> >>> Please review and vote on the release of Ripple 0.9.32. >>> >>> The package you are voting on is available for review at >>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2fdist. >>> apache.org%2frepos%2fdist%2fdev%2fincubator%2fripple%2f.&data=01%7c01%7cTBARHAM%40064d.mgd.microsoft.com%7cfefd12b0ba464c7b8a9608d2a6d65cda%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=7SYfTw19CH7OXPps%2fXnHtOs4ZuCqt2XsXFZOR2aQWpo%3d >>> The SHA-1 hash for the package is: >>> >>> 63a997594e4f08df8d48a644962b47bee4efd91e >>> >>> It was published from its corresponding git tag: >>> >>> incubator-ripple: 0.9.32 (f8c6a0bc99) >>> >>> While we need three +1 *binding* votes (which for an Apache Incubator >>> project like Ripple means Apache IPMC members), active Ripple >>> contributors and committers/PPMC members are still encouraged to >>> review the release and vote. Before voting +1, please refer to and >>> verify compliance with the checklist at >>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fincuba >>> tor.apache.org%2fguides%2freleasemanagement.html%23check-list&data=01% >>> 7c01%7cTBARHAM%40064d.mgd.microsoft.com%7cfefd12b0ba464c7b8a9608d2a6d6 >>> 5cda%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=mVviFf8dYfZFTD2Geu25 >>> Y34qUPb9Xo7W%2fOLPY4TIMJI%3d (however, we only need to consider >>> changes since the previous release). >>> >>> If you do vote +1, please include the steps you took in order to be >>> confident the release meets requirements. >>> >>> Upon a successful vote, I will upload the archive to >>> dist/release/incubator/ripple and publish it to NPM. >>> >>> I vote +1: >>> * Verified license headers with Apache RAT (using 'jake rat'). >>> * Manually verified there were no new source files that need license >>> headers, nor new third party dependencies that needed to have license >>> information included in the LICENSE file. >>> * Verified the build works and all tests pass. >>> * Manually tested all changes that have been made since the last release. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Tim >>>
