New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update pako dependency #261

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Feb 29, 2016

Conversation

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@puzrin
Contributor

puzrin commented Feb 27, 2016

Would be nice to release if possible, to use the same pako version across different projects.

@dduponchel

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@dduponchel

dduponchel Feb 28, 2016

Collaborator

I think we should use a ~1.0.0 instead of ^1.0.0. Our website advertises that JSZip is tested with nodejs 0.8 (well...) but the support of ^ was added in node 0.10.26. The travis build can't work on node 0.8 because of dependencies of devDependencies using a ^ (and a ^ our devDependencies) but npm install jszip should work.

The ^ version range is now nearly everywhere and if we can't test in node 0.8 maybe we should drop its support. Which means breaking things for those using node 0.8, so a major version bump in my opinion.

Collaborator

dduponchel commented Feb 28, 2016

I think we should use a ~1.0.0 instead of ^1.0.0. Our website advertises that JSZip is tested with nodejs 0.8 (well...) but the support of ^ was added in node 0.10.26. The travis build can't work on node 0.8 because of dependencies of devDependencies using a ^ (and a ^ our devDependencies) but npm install jszip should work.

The ^ version range is now nearly everywhere and if we can't test in node 0.8 maybe we should drop its support. Which means breaking things for those using node 0.8, so a major version bump in my opinion.

@puzrin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@puzrin

puzrin Feb 28, 2016

Contributor

Yep, sir :)

changed ^ to ~

Contributor

puzrin commented Feb 28, 2016

Yep, sir :)

changed ^ to ~

@puzrin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@puzrin

puzrin Feb 28, 2016

Contributor

About node versions. I'd recomment to drop nodes < 4.0 in next major release (3.0.0). In 2.+ it worth to keep everything unchanged.

Contributor

puzrin commented Feb 28, 2016

About node versions. I'd recomment to drop nodes < 4.0 in next major release (3.0.0). In 2.+ it worth to keep everything unchanged.

@dduponchel

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@dduponchel

dduponchel Feb 29, 2016

Collaborator

Thanks :)

Collaborator

dduponchel commented Feb 29, 2016

Thanks :)

dduponchel added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 29, 2016

@dduponchel dduponchel merged commit 4fd4fc1 into Stuk:master Feb 29, 2016

1 check passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
@puzrin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@puzrin

puzrin Mar 3, 2016

Contributor

Could you publish?

Contributor

puzrin commented Mar 3, 2016

Could you publish?

@dduponchel

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@dduponchel

dduponchel Mar 3, 2016

Collaborator

I'll see with @Stuk for a release.

Collaborator

dduponchel commented Mar 3, 2016

I'll see with @Stuk for a release.

@dduponchel dduponchel referenced this pull request Mar 22, 2016

Merged

Release v2.6.0 #272

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment