+1 - agreed on the vote. On Tue, 12 May 2015 at 14:09 Parashuram N (MS OPEN TECH) < [email protected]> wrote:
> +1, lets put it out for a vote. If we have any new features, we could > always do a new release. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2015 10:02 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Ripple release 0.9.29 > > Once again, thank you for your work on this. The first release is always > the hardest because nobody has done the helpful stuff like adding a jake > task for RAT - great stuff! > > I've not reviewed the package at this point, but based on the fact I did a > thorough review of the last package I'm all for you putting this up for a > vote. > > Ross > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tim Barham [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 9:45 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [DISCUSS] Ripple release 0.9.29 > > Based on feedback from our last attempt at a release, I believe the only > change we *need* to make for a release is to reinstate the > XMLHttpRequest.js license in LICENSE, updating it to point to the correct > version (that was released under the Apache 2.0). However, we've also had > some useful fixes over the weeks since 0.9.28, so it will be nice to > include them. In addition to those changes, I've done the following today: > > 1. Merged Julian's PR that updates our bower and jsdom so Ripple > successfully installs and builds with Node 0.11.0 and higher. > 2. Added a new jake task - 'jake rat' - that runs Apache RAT to verify > license headers in the project (verifies all files that should have license > headers do, that they recognized, and of a type acceptable in an Apache > project). This will make it easier for team members to verify a release is > clean in this regard (note that since it runs against your local repo, you > need to sync your repo to the release tag the run). Running 'jake rat' > should be completely clean at this point, as I've configured it to exclude > files with license headers it doesn't recognize, but that we have agreed > are fine. > 3. Updated package.json and doc/CHANGELOG.md for version 0.9.29 and added > a 0.9.29 tag. > > I've created an archive package if anyone wants to check it out, but > haven't done any verification on it yet. It can be found here: > http://1drv.ms/1J7SY3v. > > Anyone have any issues with moving forward with a vote thread for this > release? > > Thanks! > > Tim > >
