ripple-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Barham <Tim.Bar...@microsoft.com>
Subject [VOTE] Ripple release 0.9.30
Date Fri, 05 Jun 2015 18:41:01 GMT
Sorry for the delay getting this out, everyone. Travel + other distractions + my Mac not being
hooked up. Thanks to Arzhan for a bunch of work figuring out OpenLayers licenses. Anyway...
here it is...


Please review and vote on the release of Ripple 0.9.30.



The package you are voting on is available for review at http://1drv.ms/1H9yF5h. It was published
from its corresponding git tag:

      incubator-ripple: 0.9.30 (7830f1ac70)



Since this will be an official Apache release of Ripple (another attempt at our first official
release!), we must be particularly careful that it complies with all Apache guidelines for
an incubator release. As such, before voting +1, please refer to and verify compliance with
the checklist at  http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#check-list.



If anyone has concerns that we don't meet any of these requirements, please don't hesitate
to raise them here so we can discuss and make changes if necessary.



If you do give a +1 vote, please include what steps you took in order to be confident in the
release.



Please also note from Ross's recent email:



> What we need is three +1 "binding" votes, in reality that means three

> IPMC members. Once a project graduates it means three project

> management committee members. However, as a mentor (therefore having a

> binding vote) I look to the project participants to indicate their

> preference and (assuming no blocking issues on an IP check) I'll

> always vote in support of the communities non- binding votes.



So please, even though your vote may not be binding, take some time to review the release
and vote!



Upon a successful vote, we will arrange for the archive to be uploaded to dist/incubator/
and publish it to NPM.



I vote +1:

* I verified build works and tests all pass.

* I verified license headers with Apache RAT (via 'jake rat').

* I manually verified all third party licenses in node_modules.



Thanks,



Tim


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message