These are chat archives for ractivejs/ractive

14th
Jan 2018
Anatoli Radulov
@avoto
Jan 14 2018 02:46 UTC
:clap:
Paul Maly
@PaulMaly_twitter
Jan 14 2018 09:26 UTC
@evs-chris When do you plan to release version 0.10? Especially I am interested in realization of the await-block. As I said earlier, I'm developing the RealWorld app on Ractive and this feature would be very useful to me.
Paul Maly
@PaulMaly_twitter
Jan 14 2018 09:42 UTC
Also, maybe we ready to release a version 1.0? It would be awesome if RealWorld project could be produced on Ractive 1.0 with new logo and tagline)))) Something like - Ractive reborn, you know.
Chris Reeves
@evs-chris
Jan 14 2018 15:21 UTC
I've got a handful of big prs to polish for 0.10, and as soon as they're done, I'll publish. We settled on 0.10 before 1.0 in case we need to unbreak or rebreak anything without having to immediately hit 2.0.
Paul Maly
@PaulMaly_twitter
Jan 14 2018 16:51 UTC
Have you any ideas when you'll finish it?
Chris Reeves
@evs-chris
Jan 14 2018 16:53 UTC
nothing definite
probably within a week or three
Paul Maly
@PaulMaly_twitter
Jan 14 2018 17:01 UTC
Ok
Joseph
@fskreuz
Jan 14 2018 17:57 UTC
One can always use edge builds if the fixes are already in dev. There's no need to wait for an official version number. Every push to dev creates a build-N version in npm.
Joseph
@fskreuz
Jan 14 2018 18:08 UTC
If the fix is not even on dev, you can always point npm to Github to get code hot off the repo.
Paul Maly
@PaulMaly_twitter
Jan 14 2018 18:13 UTC
I know, but I think it's
not the right way to use not released versions in educational or demo projects
But seems I can wait this version to be released, because I still have many tasks in this project
Chris Reeves
@evs-chris
Jan 14 2018 18:35 UTC
I could also start a v0.10-dev line, which remains a valid target even after 0.10.0, because once it hits major, it shouldn't have any breaking changes
Paul Maly
@PaulMaly_twitter
Jan 14 2018 18:40 UTC
Seems it could be useful, thanks!
Joseph
@fskreuz
Jan 14 2018 18:59 UTC
Personally, semver only give consumers an idea of what to expect from code at a certain point in time, and give developers a guideline to schedule what type of change. Otherwise, they're just meaningless. One can really just pin dependencies to published commits/tags, and everything is just the same.
I've always wondered how Ractive would be if it was just a rolling release, where the versioning is like Three.js - just revision numbers, not semver.
Since technically, Ractive never really followed semver to the letter.
Paul Maly
@PaulMaly_twitter
Jan 14 2018 19:03 UTC
In my opinion we should already have about 3.xx version, at least. But it still < 1.xx
Joseph
@fskreuz
Jan 14 2018 19:04 UTC
Ractive would probably be version 42 by now... :D
Paul Maly
@PaulMaly_twitter
Jan 14 2018 19:06 UTC
)))
Chris Reeves
@evs-chris
Jan 14 2018 19:12 UTC
could just slide the minor over the major, yielding 9.11.0 as latest
Joseph
@fskreuz
Jan 14 2018 19:14 UTC
Just like how Java "8" is internally 1.8? :grin:
Chris Reeves
@evs-chris
Jan 14 2018 20:07 UTC
oh Java
Paul Maly
@PaulMaly_twitter
Jan 14 2018 20:36 UTC
@evs-chris please, inform me when you'll start v0.10-dev line. thx!