-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2k
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
release 1.6.4 #3141
Comments
And finally we would get better stack traces in mocha. |
I see, I see. While I have the ability to make releases if there was an emergency, I've never been able to build the documentation and otherwise prepare a clean release. Let's just wait until Jeremy gets the time to make a release. In my projects, I have a make target to do this so the process is entirely automated: https://github.com/michaelficarra/commonjs-everywhere/blob/f9201f47321424bd353376ea4bb23ae145aff8b8/Makefile#L20-L40 |
it would be great to document the clean release process also |
👍 |
@lydell re: mocha; Our of curiosity, with this release does Mocha work out of the box? Or do you have to hack/change the behavior of Mocha for the maps to work properly? |
Just use the |
+1 |
Working on it ... if anyone wants to pitch in -- hop on IRC, and let's get to it. |
Alright folks -- getting close to being ready for a 1.7.0 release. Please take a minute and bang on master if you can, let me know if you have any outstanding problems. There are also a couple of open tickets I'd prefer to get cleared up before releasing, to wit: #3139, #3087, #3059, #3008, #2919 ... and most importantly, although if it doesn't make it, them's the breaks: #2779. If you have any thoughts on solving those, they'd be much appreciated. |
@michaelficarra -- #3054 didn't get merged. I did this instead: ... what exactly should be changed? |
You can't "require |
@jashkenas @michaelficarra Can we make it so that if a script is loaded via the Here's a very simple test code: https://gist.github.com/chakrit/219bf9153d7cd3014af6. Running I totally understand the rationale behind splitting out the handler registration but IMO If the user is using the Otherwise many standalone scripts (test runners, self-runnable test files with shebangs, automation scripts, entrypoints, whatnots) will be broken as soon as 1.6.4 lands. And fixing them is not easy, since you have to figure out which file may or may not be run from the command line and modify each file to invoke the handler registration (could be a lot of files for large projects, which use tap, for example) p.s. or should I move my comment to #2323 instead? |
Two quick pairs of cents:
Edit: I want to say I'm really thrilled to see all the great features and fixes that have been coming. Keep up the fantastic work, everyone. Looking forward to this release! |
Agreed with both of you. That is how CSR behaves:
|
Any status on this update? I'd love to give it a shot. |
You can now `require('coffee-script/register')` to manually register, and the compiler auto-registers when directly running a coffee file.
@michaelficarra Just tried master and seems it is fixed now. 👍 |
Does this new registration thing mean that we should run |
@lydell: Yes. Also, if you want to require coffee files from your tests, I believe you need to pass |
@michaelficarra @lydell: you don't need to pass |
Can you just ship ANYTHING? I'm pretty tired of dealing with coffeescript issues that were fixed in master 4 months ago |
No chaining syntax and gen support till 2014? Santa gave me socks this christmas. |
A Christmas release it shall be (let's hope). CoffeeScript was originally released as a festive holiday gift: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1014080 ... so it'll make for a nice anniversary. |
I remember rushing to get a few fixes in before the 1.0 Christmas release, also. |
Regular releases at known time points are considered good for any project. |
Today's not looking likely, I'm afraid, folks — unless someone else wants to do the paperwork, and have me push the button. Cousins in town. |
Take your time. |
+1 |
Is there an estimated release date for 1.6.4 yet? |
@pmgration 2015. |
Let's move our discussion to more corresponding issue. |
@paulmillr That's a joke, right? :) |
More like a "I've had enough". Original post still stands, though: reopening. |
Perhaps we should open an "Reduce the amount of paper-work needed to publish a release" issue and an "Formulate a release policy, so that bigger changes don’t block simple bug fixes" issue. But obviously it is not as easy as I might make it sound ;) |
@lydell: Yes, we've been trying to do that for a while. Recently, #3198 made a big step in that direction, moving us away from ruby/ultraviolet for building the docs. Now we can finally automate the release process, or at least get it documented so any of the maintainers can confiedently cut a release. In some of my projects, I have completely automated releases. |
This probably won't help out people waiting on a new release much, but I pushed |
I think that's a fantastic idea. Although having |
I love the idea of |
|
I didn't know about that feature. Super useful. Thanks. |
|
@jashkenas @michaelficarra I think |
We certainly do. I'm happy to push the button if someone wants to write up the changelog, and edit the docs to match. |
@jashkenas I'll look into it, but could you give your opinion on operators (#2887), I think that's well settled; and expansion (#3268), should get either closed or accepted. |
Moving to "Release 1.7.0"... |
source maps update is good
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: