When calls were made to test 3.0.4.rc1, I followed up a few days afterward for the latest SQL Server adapter. Santiago was nice enough to pick up on my ticket for a calculation bug [1] and got it committed to master [2] and then 3-0-stable [3] so it can make it in the next release. I just ran my test suite on the tag of the repo and it appears these did not make it in the v3.0.4 release. How did that happen? Is there anything else that did not make it in? In general I am just really confused and a bit anxious about an article coming out soon on the latest adapter. Perhaps there is a work flow problem for the release or maybe my single commit/patch is lost in git? I can easily release the 3.0.4 compliant version of the adapter with a monkey patch, but this seemed odd enough to find out what happened. Thoughts? [1] https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994/tickets/6365 [2] https://github.com/rails/rails/commit/95d5d9b6c48c08f1fba0c77ecbc97b62b2603824 [3] https://github.com/rails/rails/commit/068527baaf9a49862281c4357296262ae73542d0 -- 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 Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Ken Collins <ken@metaskills.net> wrote:> > When calls were made to test 3.0.4.rc1, I followed up a few days afterward for the latest SQL Server adapter. Santiago was nice enough to pick up on my ticket for a calculation bug [1] and got it committed to master [2] and then 3-0-stable [3] so it can make it in the next release. I just ran my test suite on the tag of the repo and it appears these did not make it in the v3.0.4 release. How did that happen? Is there anything else that did not make it in?The 3.0.4 final release was the 3.0.4rc1 + the security fixes. Nothing else. Your stuff wasn''t a release blocker so it was left out. We can do a 3.0.5 release in a week or so to catch any other issues that get noticed in the interim, I just felt that it was more important we get the 3.0.4 release out with no risk of additional regressions given the severity of the CSRF bug. -- 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.
> The 3.0.4 final release was the 3.0.4rc1 + the security fixes. Nothing > else. Your stuff wasn''t a release blocker so it was left out.Good point, I hadn''t considered that. Seeing that 3.0.5 is still around the corner is promising. I also think it preemptively answers my other questions about a patch to the limit/offset back, forth and workings with ARel. I''m gonna give up on making sense of anything else for the rest of the day as I''m not doing a good job of it :/ - Thanks for the reply and clarification! Ken -- 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.
> Good point, I hadn''t considered that. > > Seeing that 3.0.5 is still around the corner is promising. I also think it preemptively answers my other questions about a patch to the limit/offset back, forth and workings with ARel.Yep, make sure to ping aaron to be sure that 3-0-stable starts doing the ''right'' thing asap.> I''m gonna give up on making sense of anything else for the rest of the day as I''m not doing a good job of it :/As am I, ;)> > - Thanks for the reply and clarification! > Ken > > -- > 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. > >-- 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.
>> Seeing that 3.0.5 is still around the corner is promising. I also think it preemptively answers my other questions about a patch to the limit/offset back, forth and workings with ARel. > > Yep, make sure to ping aaron to be sure that 3-0-stable starts doing > the ''right'' thing asap.FYI, I was wrong about offset. I doubt sql literal strings make any sense for most DBs. I have created a patch for the limit here. https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994-ruby-on-rails/tickets/6400-allow-arel-sql-literal-nodes-for-limit - Ken -- 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.