i would be remiss not to add that the real problem alluded to here is that the only published manual is for librejs v6 which describes the specification as used by many librejs v6 compliant websites today[1] - i.e. this message was the first published source of the information that the spec had changed; and it came in the form of a reply to a bug report - clearly, this would not be considered for any list of engineering "best practices"
the existing manual actually refers an external web page for the actual spec[2] - that is a bad idea IMHO - the specs on the external "free-your-javascript" web page are much better formed and more complete than the manual - that entire web page should really be part of the manual - in any case, that is critical information and must also be updated if the spec has changed along with any other relevant parts of the GNU website that mention or link to librejs v6 - i suggested this in december as one of the necessary chore tasks that should be completed BEFORE releasing the new version as "official" and "stable"[3] - as far as i can see, aside from the mozilla page being updated with the new release (which should have been the FINAL task), the only items on the chore list that were actually done were the ones that i did myself, (namely, rebasing and tagging the git repo) - i started helping nathan to sign the tarball and installer; but that is the last i heard of any progress of the release chores - all i can see is that the software is still not available from the GNU FTP server; so even if nathan had succeeded in signing the artifacts, that would have been for naught as of today because no one uploaded them to the distribution server unfortunately, the only remaining tasks that either i or nathan can accomplish would be updating the documentation; but even if that were done today, it would only be available via git - the majority of remaining tasks must be completed by a GNU webmaster - zach mentioned he would try contacting them but again i have heard of no progress other than what i just mentioned here - the main point being that ALL such maintenance chores should have been completed before releasing out of "alpha" and that is the root of the issue raised in this thread [1]: https://www.gnu.org/software/librejs/manual/html_node/Setting-Your-JavaScript-Free.html [2]: https://www.gnu.org/software/librejs/free-your-javascript.html#magnet-link-license [3]: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-librejs/2017-12/msg00001.html
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
