This vote is now closed with a total of 4 +1s, no +0s and no -1s. The
results are:
BINDING VOTES:
+1 (4 -- Ted Wilmes, Daniel Kuppitz, Stephen Mallette, Jason Plurad)
0 (0)
-1 (0)
NON-BINDING VOTES:
+1 (0)
0 (0)
-1 (0)
Thank you very much,
Ted Wilmes
pluradj
On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 4:07 PM Stephen Mallette
wrote:
> what's you're nuget account name?
>
> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 6:53 PM, Jason Plurad wrote:
>
> > I created a nuget account also. I believe I'm already associated with the
> > TinkerPop on npm.
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 3:52 PM
what's you're nuget account name?
On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 6:53 PM, Jason Plurad wrote:
> I created a nuget account also. I believe I'm already associated with the
> TinkerPop on npm.
>
> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 3:52 PM, Jason Plurad wrote:
>
> > Validated the binaries, did several manual tests wi
I created a nuget account also. I believe I'm already associated with the
TinkerPop on npm.
On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 3:52 PM, Jason Plurad wrote:
> Validated the binaries, did several manual tests with the Gremlin Server +
> Gremlin Console, looked over the documentation.
>
> VOTE: +1
>
> On Wed,
Validated the binaries, did several manual tests with the Gremlin Server +
Gremlin Console, looked over the documentation.
VOTE: +1
On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 9:22 AM, Ted Wilmes wrote:
> Thanks for catching that Jorge. I'm okay with the hack. I'll setup an
> npms.js and nuget account.
>
> --Ted
>
Thanks for catching that Jorge. I'm okay with the hack. I'll setup an
npms.js and nuget account.
--Ted
On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 7:29 AM, Stephen Mallette
wrote:
> If everyone else is ok with the little hack job to get this first
> deployment out, I think I am.
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 7:55 AM
If everyone else is ok with the little hack job to get this first
deployment out, I think I am.
On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 7:55 AM, Jorge Bay Gondra
wrote:
> Whatever you feel more comfortable, as the only risk is publishing it under
> the name gremlin-javascript which is going to be deprecated any
Whatever you feel more comfortable, as the only risk is publishing it under
the name gremlin-javascript which is going to be deprecated anyways.
If you are going to manually execute "npm publish" in your terminal, you
have to only change the package name in package.json.
If you are planning to use
ugh - not to be sloppy but do we need to kill the artifacts we've already
built over that? how bad would it be if we simply remembered to make that
change at time of deployment? would that cause problems?
On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 5:44 AM, Jorge Bay Gondra
wrote:
> It looks like the JavaScript pack
It looks like the JavaScript package still points to "gremlin-javascript",
instead of "gremlin"
https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/blob/3.2.8/gremlin-javascript/src/main/javascript/gremlin-javascript/package.json#L2
We should change that on both 3.2 and 3.3 branches.
Also, if you are planning t
validate-distributions.sh was clean for me. also gave some review to the
docs and what i looked at seemed good to go:
VOTE +1
On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Daniel Kuppitz wrote:
> Looks good.
>
> *Validating binary distributions*
>
> * downloading Apache TinkerPop Gremlin
> (apache-tinkerpop
Looks good.
*Validating binary distributions*
* downloading Apache TinkerPop Gremlin
(apache-tinkerpop-gremlin-console-3.2.8-bin.zip)... OK
* validating signatures and checksums ...
* PGP signature ... OK
* MD5 checksum ... OK
* SHA1 checksum ... OK
* unzipping Apache TinkerPop Gremlin ...
Hello,
We are happy to announce that TinkerPop 3.2.8 is ready for release.
The release artifacts can be found at this location:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tinkerpop/3.2.8/
The source distribution is provided by:
apache-tinkerpop-3.2.8-src.zip
Two binary distributions
13 matches
Mail list logo
