was there any talk at railsconf or any talk in the chat rooms about rails 2.0 release. i seems they chose the new version number because it won''t be backwards compatible with 1.x sites. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On 6/24/07, plewizard <somethingnoonehasthoughtof-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > was there any talk at railsconf or any talk in the chat rooms about > rails 2.0 release. i seems they chose the new version number because > it won''t be backwards compatible with 1.x sites.There''s no release date set. There will most likely be a round of RC releases before 2.0 drops though. -- Rick Olson http://lighthouseapp.com http://weblog.techno-weenie.net http://mephistoblog.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Jun 24, 2007, at 6:30 PM, Rick Olson wrote:> On 6/24/07, plewizard <somethingnoonehasthoughtof-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: >> >> was there any talk at railsconf or any talk in the chat rooms about >> rails 2.0 release. i seems they chose the new version number because >> it won''t be backwards compatible with 1.x sites. > > There''s no release date set. There will most likely be a round of RC > releases before 2.0 drops though. > > -- > Rick Olson > http://lighthouseapp.com > http://weblog.techno-weenie.net > http://mephistoblog.comWhat about the part of the question on whether the 2.0 release will be backwardly compatible with 1.x? Actually, I think that the more interesting way to phrase that is whether 1.2.x will be forwardly compatible with 2.0? I have a 1.1.6 and soon to be 1.2.2 site in production. (The 1.2.3 bugfix for ruby1.8.6 is probably going to replace 1.2.2 before it''s really live.) I know that I''m occasionally tripped up by trying to use something from 1.2.x that doesn''t exist in 1.1.6, but that hasn''t yet overwhelmed my expectation of effort to move that application to 1.2.x. I know 1.2.x isn''t backwardly compatible with 1.1.x and I wouldn''t expect 1.(n+1).x to be with any 1.n.x. However, 1.n.x is typically going to work in 1.(n+1).0, but the effort move from 1.x (of anything) to 2.0 can be almost anything. I haven''t tracked Edge since the pre-1.1 days when I wanted to trade my hand-rolled polymorphic associations for a built-in implementation so I don''t have a good foundation for building an expectation of the 1.2.x to 2.0 transition for an existing application. -Rob Rob Biedenharn http://agileconsultingllc.com Rob-xa9cJyRlE0mWcWVYNo9pwxS2lgjeYSpx@public.gmane.org
On Jun 25, 2007, at 00:30 , Rick Olson wrote:> On 6/24/07, plewizard <somethingnoonehasthoughtof-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: >> >> was there any talk at railsconf or any talk in the chat rooms about >> rails 2.0 release. i seems they chose the new version number because >> it won''t be backwards compatible with 1.x sites. > > There''s no release date set. There will most likely be a round of RC > releases before 2.0 drops though.And a 2.0.1 immediately after ;) -- Jakob Skjerning - http://mentalized.net --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
It will definitely not be plug-compatible. There were many changes reported at RailsConf that would change how things work. There are warnings in 1.2.3 for at least some of them such as :class_name when defining associations. There were changes to the REST routing, soap web services are being moved to a plugin in favor of REST in the core, etc. You can always create an edge play area and do some of the porting early to reduce the impact. Michael On Jun 25, 2007, at 9:30 AM, Rob Biedenharn wrote:> On Jun 24, 2007, at 6:30 PM, Rick Olson wrote: >> On 6/24/07, plewizard <somethingnoonehasthoughtof-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: >>> >>> was there any talk at railsconf or any talk in the chat rooms about >>> rails 2.0 release. i seems they chose the new version number >>> because >>> it won''t be backwards compatible with 1.x sites. >> >> There''s no release date set. There will most likely be a round of RC >> releases before 2.0 drops though. >> >> -- Rick Olson >> http://lighthouseapp.com >> http://weblog.techno-weenie.net >> http://mephistoblog.com > > What about the part of the question on whether the 2.0 release will > be backwardly compatible with 1.x? > > Actually, I think that the more interesting way to phrase that is > whether 1.2.x will be forwardly compatible with 2.0? > > I have a 1.1.6 and soon to be 1.2.2 site in production. (The 1.2.3 > bugfix for ruby1.8.6 is probably going to replace 1.2.2 before it''s > really live.) I know that I''m occasionally tripped up by trying to > use something from 1.2.x that doesn''t exist in 1.1.6, but that > hasn''t yet overwhelmed my expectation of effort to move that > application to 1.2.x. I know 1.2.x isn''t backwardly compatible > with 1.1.x and I wouldn''t expect 1.(n+1).x to be with any 1.n.x. > However, 1.n.x is typically going to work in 1.(n+1).0, but the > effort move from 1.x (of anything) to 2.0 can be almost anything. > > I haven''t tracked Edge since the pre-1.1 days when I wanted to > trade my hand-rolled polymorphic associations for a built-in > implementation so I don''t have a good foundation for building an > expectation of the 1.2.x to 2.0 transition for an existing > application. > > -Rob > > Rob Biedenharn http://agileconsultingllc.com > Rob-xa9cJyRlE0mWcWVYNo9pwxS2lgjeYSpx@public.gmane.org > > >
Michael Latta wrote:> There are > warnings in 1.2.3 for at least some of them such as :class_name when > defining associations.Where can I find more information on the future of :class_name? I just used this option in my 1.2.3 app so now I''m curious. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
If you just use :class_name without :foreign_key you get the message stating that in 2.0 they are changing the default from <class_name>_id to <association_name>_id. The new default makes more sense than the old default, but for 1.2 they are recommending that you set it explicitly so it will not break when upgrading. Michael On Jun 25, 2007, at 1:41 PM, Carl Johnson wrote:> > Michael Latta wrote: >> There are >> warnings in 1.2.3 for at least some of them such as :class_name when >> defining associations. > > Where can I find more information on the future of :class_name? I just > used this option in my 1.2.3 app so now I''m curious. > > -- > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. > To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk- > unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/ > group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en > -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- >