Hey guys, I''ve spent some time backporting most of the bugfixes from edge to the 2-0-stable branch. If you''re currently running on 2.0.2 and feel like helping out, I''d be really interested in reports of any breakages. Additionally, the patch in #10804 [1] should probably be backported. If someone could help out there I''d really appreciate it Assuming testing goes well we can push out a new point release in the near future. [1] http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/10804 -- Cheers Koz --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Hey Koz,
What do you guys think of adding a pessimistic version constraint to
RAILS_GEM_VERSION in the app skeleton generator?
http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/11069
E.g. to have
RAILS_GEM_VERSION = ''~> 2.0.2''
instead of locking it to a specific point release
RAILS_GEM_VERSION = ''2.0.2''
That way applications would use any 2.0.x gem installed that''s higher
than
2.0.2, but not 2.1.x. If we had the version constraint in our current
applications, now when you roll out 2.0.3 we could have simply installed the
gem and automatically benefit from it.
- Mislav
On Feb 10, 2008 3:05 AM, Michael Koziarski <michael@koziarski.com> wrote:
>
> Hey guys,
>
> I''ve spent some time backporting most of the bugfixes from edge to
the
> 2-0-stable branch. If you''re currently running on 2.0.2 and feel
like
> helping out, I''d be really interested in reports of any breakages.
>
> Additionally, the patch in #10804 [1] should probably be backported.
> If someone could help out there I''d really appreciate it
>
> Assuming testing goes well we can push out a new point release in the
> near future.
>
> [1] http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/10804
>
> --
> Cheers
>
> Koz
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
> What do you guys think of adding a pessimistic version constraint to > RAILS_GEM_VERSION in the app skeleton generator? > http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/11069 > > E.g. to have > RAILS_GEM_VERSION = ''~> 2.0.2'' > instead of locking it to a specific point release > RAILS_GEM_VERSION = ''2.0.2'' > > That way applications would use any 2.0.x gem installed that''s higher than > 2.0.2, but not 2.1.x. If we had the version constraint in our current > applications, now when you roll out 2.0.3 we could have simply installed the > gem and automatically benefit from it.We put this in to prevent people getting auto-updated when their shared host runs a gem update. If this method of specifying the version would do 2.0.x but not 2.1, then I suppose it''d be fine? Anyone have any reasons we shouldn''t do this? -- Cheers Koz --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Feb 11, 2008 1:54 AM, Michael Koziarski <michael@koziarski.com> wrote:> > We put this in to prevent people getting auto-updated when their > shared host runs a gem update.The question we should be asking ourselves is whether we *want* people to get auto-updated on point releases?> If this method of specifying the > version would do 2.0.x but not 2.1, then I suppose it''d be fine?See for yourself: r = Gem::Requirement.new ''~>2.0.2'' r.satisfied_by? Gem::Version.new(''2.0.3'') #=> true r.satisfied_by? Gem::Version.new(''2.1.0'') => false Anyone have any reasons we shouldn''t do this? Well, I can think of a reason: when a user didn''t have time/knowledge to understand a bug that he stumbled on, so he built part of the functionality on it (relying on the wrong behavior). Then, when the bug gets fixed the application breaks. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Feb 10, 2008 6:39 AM, Mislav Marohnić <mislav.marohnic@gmail.com> wrote:> Hey Koz, > > What do you guys think of adding a pessimistic version constraint to > RAILS_GEM_VERSION in the app skeleton generator? > http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/11069 > > E.g. to have > RAILS_GEM_VERSION = '~> 2.0.2' > instead of locking it to a specific point release > RAILS_GEM_VERSION = '2.0.2' > > That way applications would use any 2.0.x gem installed that's higher than > 2.0.2, but not 2.1.x. If we had the version constraint in our current > applications, now when you roll out 2.0.3 we could have simply installed the > gem and automatically benefit from it.I don't think this is a good idea. By default, all dependencies should be locked (in gem specs and generated files), to avoid nasty surprises for people who don't want or don't know how to deal with them. If you want to float on the newest release, it should be easy to opt-in - and it is, since I pushed for the patches to allow this :) You can't predict the future, it may hold bugs, even in released "versions" As evidence, see the Test::Unit superclass breakages in the post ~>2.0 releases Thanks, -- Chad --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Feb 10, 9:27 pm, "Mislav Marohnić" <mislav.maroh...@gmail.com> wrote:> Anyone have any reasons we shouldn''t do this? > > Well, I can think of a reason: when a user didn''t have time/knowledge to > understand a bug that he stumbled on, so he built part of the functionality > on it (relying on the wrong behavior). Then, when the bug gets fixed the > application breaks.Best case, tests will fail :-) Users who don''t want automatic bug fixes should freeze their app and not rely on shared host''s gems anyway. Worst case, users will complain and then get told that they should (a) write tests, and (b) freeze their app. I''m +1 on this idea. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
2008/2/11 Chad Woolley <thewoolleyman@gmail.com>:> > You can''t predict the future, it may hold bugs, even in released > "versions" As evidence, see the Test::Unit superclass breakages in > the post ~>2.0 releasesChad, You may be right. As a compromise, could we put in a comment which mentions the constraint above the frozen version? That way people can opt-in to automatically upgrade on point releases. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Feb 11, 2008 12:11 PM, Mislav Marohnić <mislav.marohnic@gmail.com> wrote:> 2008/2/11 Chad Woolley <thewoolleyman@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > You can't predict the future, it may hold bugs, even in released > > "versions" As evidence, see the Test::Unit superclass breakages in > > the post ~>2.0 releases > > Chad, > > You may be right. As a compromise, could we put in a comment which mentions > the constraint above the frozen version? That way people can opt-in to > automatically upgrade on point releases.That is a great idea. Post the patch! --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On 2/11/08, Mislav Marohnić <mislav.marohnic@gmail.com> wrote:> 2008/2/11 Chad Woolley <thewoolleyman@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > You can't predict the future, it may hold bugs, even in released > > "versions" As evidence, see the Test::Unit superclass breakages in > > the post ~>2.0 releases > > Chad, > > You may be right. As a compromise, could we put in a comment which mentions > the constraint above the frozen version? That way people can opt-in to > automatically upgrade on point releases.I'm also -1 on this. I prefer you give an explicit version spec if you actually want it. jeremy --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Feb 10, 2:05 am, "Michael Koziarski" <mich...@koziarski.com> wrote:> I''ve spent some time backporting most of the bugfixes from edge to the > 2-0-stable branch. If you''re currently running on 2.0.2 and feel like > helping out, I''d be really interested in reports of any breakages.Hi (and <delurk>), I tried the current 2-0-stable branch today with postgresql 8.3 and OS X 10.5.2. Changeset [8828] introduced a slew of AR test failures. The fix for these is in [8663], which applied cleanly to my 2-0-stable checkout. With that applied, I have one remaining test failure: test_native_types(MigrationTest) [./test/migration_test.rb:324:in `test_native_types'' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/mocha-0.5.6/lib/mocha/ test_case_adapter.rb:19:in `__send__'' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/mocha-0.5.6/lib/mocha/ test_case_adapter.rb:19:in `run'']: <0> expected to be != to <Rational(0, 1)>. This is also present in 2.0.2 and edge, so it may well be something to do with my local setup. As for my applications, they seem to be fine under 2-0-stable. Stephen Veiss --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Feb 12, 2008 10:08 AM, Stephen Veiss <stephen@brokenbottle.net> wrote:> I tried the current 2-0-stable branch today with postgresql 8.3 and OS > X 10.5.2. Changeset [8828] introduced a slew of AR test failures. The > fix for these is in [8663], which applied cleanly to my 2-0-stable > checkout. With that applied, I have one remaining test failure:Should there be a separate CI build for the stable branch as well? That would give early warning of these type of problems. It''s a good practice to have your release branch as well as trunk on CI, and I''ve suggested this to Alexey. It is easy to do in cc.rb... -- Chad --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
> Should there be a separate CI build for the stable branch as well? > That would give early warning of these type of problems. It''s a good > practice to have your release branch as well as trunk on CI, and I''ve > suggested this to Alexey. It is easy to do in cc.rb... >Yeah, a stable branch CI build would be fantastic, do you need anything from us alexey? -- Cheers Koz --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Feb 12, 2008 2:50 PM, Michael Koziarski <michael@koziarski.com> wrote:> > Should there be a separate CI build for the stable branch as well? > > That would give early warning of these type of problems. It''s a good > > practice to have your release branch as well as trunk on CI, and I''ve > > suggested this to Alexey. It is easy to do in cc.rb... > Yeah, a stable branch CI build would be fantastic, do you need > anything from us alexey?Heh... not really. All it takes is some sysadmining. I''ll try to get it done some time this week. -- Alexey Verkhovsky CruiseControl.rb [http://cruisecontrolrb.thoughtworks.com] RubyWorks [http://rubyworks.thoughtworks.com] --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Hi, Looking forward to a new stable release but I''m wondering if the issues with ActionController::TestCase can be fixed up in 2.0.x. Currently there''s a bug in 2.0.2 which overrides setup-methods in your testcase which got fixed in stable with http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/10382 This led to an issue with fixtures not working in testcases, which is still present in the stable branch. This bug is discussed in http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/10679 and got fixed with a big changeset to trunk: http://dev.rubyonrails.org/changeset/8570 Any possibility of this last changeset being ported to stable? Cheers, Menno On 10 feb, 03:05, "Michael Koziarski" <mich...@koziarski.com> wrote:> Hey guys, > > I''ve spent some time backporting most of the bugfixes from edge to the > 2-0-stable branch. If you''re currently running on 2.0.2 and feel like > helping out, I''d be really interested in reports of any breakages. > > Additionally, the patch in #10804 [1] should probably be backported. > If someone could help out there I''d really appreciate it > > Assuming testing goes well we can push out a new point release in the > near future. > > [1]http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/10804 > > -- > Cheers > > Koz--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Feb 18, 2008 5:05 AM, <menno.sman@gmail.com> wrote:> > Hi, > > Looking forward to a new stable release but I''m wondering if the > issues with ActionController::TestCase can be fixed up in 2.0.x. > Currently there''s a bug in 2.0.2 which overrides setup-methods in your > testcase which got fixed in stable with http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/10382 > > This led to an issue with fixtures not working in testcases, which is > still present in the stable branch. This bug is discussed in > http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/10679 and got fixed with a big > changeset to trunk: http://dev.rubyonrails.org/changeset/8570 > > Any possibility of this last changeset being ported to stable?+1 This is definitely a key change we are waiting on (still on 1.99.0 on some projects because of it), but I haven''t had time to dig into the stable branch and make sure everything works with multi-level testcase inheritence and setup. Thanks, -- Chad --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 04:05:57AM -0800, menno.sman@gmail.com wrote:> Looking forward to a new stable release but I''m wondering if the > issues with ActionController::TestCase can be fixed up in 2.0.x. > Currently there''s a bug in 2.0.2 which overrides setup-methods in your > testcase which got fixed in stable with http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/10382 > > This led to an issue with fixtures not working in testcases, which is > still present in the stable branch. This bug is discussed in > http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/10679 and got fixed with a big > changeset to trunk: http://dev.rubyonrails.org/changeset/8570 > > Any possibility of this last changeset being ported to stable?The probability is non-zero, but it goes way up if you get in and give it a go yourself. You''ve got the same access to resources as anyone else. <grin> - Matt --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
That changeset is fairly intrusive and doesn''t seem safe to backport. Is there a lower-risk alternative out there? Cheers Koz On 19/02/2008, at 6:19 AM, "Chad Woolley" <thewoolleyman@gmail.com> wrote:> > On Feb 18, 2008 5:05 AM, <menno.sman@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> Looking forward to a new stable release but I''m wondering if the >> issues with ActionController::TestCase can be fixed up in 2.0.x. >> Currently there''s a bug in 2.0.2 which overrides setup-methods in >> your >> testcase which got fixed in stable with http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/10382 >> >> This led to an issue with fixtures not working in testcases, which is >> still present in the stable branch. This bug is discussed in >> http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/10679 and got fixed with a big >> changeset to trunk: http://dev.rubyonrails.org/changeset/8570 >> >> Any possibility of this last changeset being ported to stable? > > +1 > > This is definitely a key change we are waiting on (still on 1.99.0 on > some projects because of it), but I haven''t had time to dig into the > stable branch and make sure everything works with multi-level testcase > inheritence and setup. > > Thanks, > -- Chad > > >--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On 10 Feb 2008, at 02:05, Michael Koziarski wrote:> > Hey guys, > > I''ve spent some time backporting most of the bugfixes from edge to the > 2-0-stable branch. If you''re currently running on 2.0.2 and feel like > helping out, I''d be really interested in reports of any breakages. >I have a local branch of our app on stable HEAD and it all seems to be running fine. I was wondering if http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/ 11108 will make it to stable? Cheers, Chris --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
> The probability is non-zero, but it goes way up if you get in and give it a > go yourself. You''ve got the same access to resources as anyone else. > <grin>You''re absolutely right. The big changeset with all the chaining scared me a little bit, but I think I''ve found a simple fix for stable. I''ve submitted a patch and test: http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/11162 Review and verification is much appreciated. Cheers, Menno --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Feb 19, 2008 11:31 PM, Chris McGrath <chris@octopod.info> wrote:> > On 10 Feb 2008, at 02:05, Michael Koziarski wrote: > > > > > Hey guys, > > > > I''ve spent some time backporting most of the bugfixes from edge to the > > 2-0-stable branch. If you''re currently running on 2.0.2 and feel like > > helping out, I''d be really interested in reports of any breakages. > > > > I have a local branch of our app on stable HEAD and it all seems to be > running fine. I was wondering if http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/ > 11108 will make it to stable?No, we won''t be backporting performance fixes, our prior experience with that was pretty painful :/ -- Cheers Koz --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
> I''ve submitted a patch and test: http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/11162 > > Review and verification is much appreciated.I''ve applied this to stable now, could people please test and report back. -- Cheers Koz --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Any chance of http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/10980 making it to stable? I''d say it''s a pretty crucial fix. It was fixed in the following changeset: http://dev.rubyonrails.org/changeset/8787. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Gerjan Stokkink < ruby-forum-incoming@andreas-s.net> wrote:> > Any chance of http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/10980 making it to > stable? I''d say it''s a pretty crucial fix. It was fixed in the following > changeset: http://dev.rubyonrails.org/changeset/8787.Isn''t this a feature change? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
> > Any chance of http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/10980 making it to > > stable? I''d say it''s a pretty crucial fix. It was fixed in the following > > changeset: http://dev.rubyonrails.org/changeset/8787. > > Isn''t this a feature change?Yeah, it''s not going to be backported. Load order changes like that can have unpredictable impacts on people''s applications. -- Cheers Koz --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Hey, I''ve played around a bit more with the stable branch and hit an issue with Enumerable#group_by. The implementation in 2.0.2 returns a hash, the 2-0-stable branch returns an array. See http://dev.rubyonrails.org/changeset/8605 This has been changed again to an OrderedHash in trunk. See http://dev.rubyonrails.org/changeset/8700 Simplest solution would be to backport r8700, worst case scenario r8605 can be rolled back. Cheers, Menno On 10 feb, 03:05, "Michael Koziarski" <mich...@koziarski.com> wrote:> Hey guys, > > I''ve spent some time backporting most of the bugfixes from edge to the > 2-0-stable branch. If you''re currently running on 2.0.2 and feel like > helping out, I''d be really interested in reports of any breakages. > > Additionally, the patch in #10804 [1] should probably be backported. > If someone could help out there I''d really appreciate it > > Assuming testing goes well we can push out a new point release in the > near future. > > [1]http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/10804 > > -- > Cheers > > Koz--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
I merged the OrderedHash changes into 2-0-stable, Is your app all clear now? Alexey, any progress on a CI rig for stable? ;) -- Cheers Koz --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---