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. > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >
