Most of my migrations are by number, not timestamp, but 5 or 6 of them (the most recent) are with timestamp. These I want to move to number based, and now I want to forward the migration table to the appropriate number. How do I force the table to update without actually running the migration, or should I migrate down to 5 or 6 ago (before timestamp) and then migrate up again with numbers? -- 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
Tyler Smart wrote:> Most of my migrations are by number, not timestamp, but 5 or 6 of them > (the most recent) are with timestamp. These I want to move to number > based, and now I want to forward the migration table to the appropriate > number. How do I force the table to update without actually running the > migration, or should I migrate down to 5 or 6 ago (before timestamp) and > then migrate up again with numbers?You don''t want to do any of this. Timestamped migrations are the default in Rails, and there''s really no good reason to avoid there use AFAIK. What''s your ultimate goal? Best, -- Marnen Laibow-Koser http://www.marnen.org marnen-sbuyVjPbboAdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org -- 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
Hi Tyler, Tyler Smart wrote:> Most of my migrations are by number, not timestamp, but 5 or 6 of them > (the most recent) are with timestamp. These I want to move to number > based, and now I want to forward the migration table to the appropriate > number. How do I force the table to update without actually running the > migration, or should I migrate down to 5 or 6 ago (before timestamp) and > then migrate up again with numbers?The answer to your question is yes: migrate down, change the names of the time-stamped migrations to be number based, then migrate back up. IME, there are good reasons to avoid time-stamped migrations. The chief ones are that they allow lazy communication between members of the development team and poor habits in terms of update before commit. If you use number-based migrations you will catch problems at the rake db:migrate level. Using time-stamped migrations you''ll not catch them until your tests or your users do: a much more time-intensive debugging circumstance. I''m not saying there aren''t situations where time-stamped migrations aren''t worth the risk. But the fact that you have a mix of number-based and time-stamped migrations indicates a possible communication problem. Anything that reduces the need for proactive communication between team members should be carefully considered re: the risks. Just $0.02 from someone with a long history of and current responsibility for ensuring effective and efficient communication among the team. Best regards, Bill -- 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
Bill Walton wrote:> Hi Tyler, > > Tyler Smart wrote: >> Most of my migrations are by number, not timestamp, but 5 or 6 of them >> (the most recent) are with timestamp. These I want to move to number >> based, and now I want to forward the migration table to the appropriate >> number. How do I force the table to update without actually running the >> migration, or should I migrate down to 5 or 6 ago (before timestamp) and >> then migrate up again with numbers? > > The answer to your question is yes: migrate down, change the names of > the time-stamped migrations to be number based, then migrate back up.If you''re going to do that. But don''t do it.> > IME, there are good reasons to avoid time-stamped migrations.Not a one IMHO.> The > chief ones are that they allow lazy communication between members of > the development team and poor habits in terms of update before commit.How so?> If you use number-based migrations you will catch problems at the > rake db:migrate level. Using time-stamped migrations you''ll not catch > them until your tests or your users do: a much more time-intensive > debugging circumstance.You are making a false assumption here: that every migration in the codebase eventually gets incorporated into trunk. The advantage of timestamped migrations is that they let developers try migrations out on their development branches that don''t necessarily get incorporated into trunk. For example, if trunk is at version 9, and I make changes in my branch that require migrations 10 and 11, but the maintainer only takes migration 11, then he will have to renumber it to 10 before running it, and that''s silly. It also destroys any meaning that the migration ID 10 might have had in determining the database schema. Timestamped migrations, on the other hand, effectively give a unique ID to each change to the DB schema, regardless of how many changes come before. This is the superior numbering scheme.> I''m not saying there aren''t situations where > time-stamped migrations aren''t worth the risk. But the fact that you > have a mix of number-based and time-stamped migrations indicates a > possible communication problem.Or a Rails upgrade.> Anything that reduces the need for > proactive communication between team members should be carefully > considered re: the risks.I''m not sure I agree when it comes to integration issues. Yes, communication is important, but the more the VCS and build system can automate, the better, other things being equal. Serially numbering migrations takes away automatability. Don''t do that.> > Just $0.02 from someone with a long history of and current > responsibility for ensuring effective and efficient communication > among the team. > > Best regards, > BillBest, -- Marnen Laibow-Koser http://www.marnen.org marnen-sbuyVjPbboAdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org -- 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
Hi Marnen, On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 3:46 PM, Marnen Laibow-Koser <lists-fsXkhYbjdPsEEoCn2XhGlw@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Bill Walton wrote: >> IME, there are good reasons to avoid time-stamped migrations. > > Not a one IMHO.You are certainly entitled to your opinion. But knowing as I do that you have no leadership experience in a software development role, your opinions on topics like this have no weight. Best regards and hopes that you''ll find a Rails job soon, Bill -- 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
Bill Walton wrote:> Hi Marnen, > > On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 3:46 PM, Marnen Laibow-Koser > <lists-fsXkhYbjdPsEEoCn2XhGlw@public.gmane.org> wrote: >> Bill Walton wrote: >>> IME, there are good reasons to avoid time-stamped migrations. >> >> Not a one IMHO. > > You are certainly entitled to your opinion. But knowing as I do that > you have no leadership experience in a software development role, your > opinions on topics like this have no weight. > > Best regards and hopes that you''ll find a Rails job soon,I''m in one currently for a Fortune 100 company. Spare me the condescension.> Bill-- 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
Bill Walton wrote:> Hi Marnen, > > On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 3:46 PM, Marnen Laibow-Koser > <lists-fsXkhYbjdPsEEoCn2XhGlw@public.gmane.org> wrote: >> Bill Walton wrote: >>> IME, there are good reasons to avoid time-stamped migrations. >> >> Not a one IMHO. > > You are certainly entitled to your opinion. But knowing as I do that > you have no leadership experience in a software development role, your > opinions on topics like this have no weight.Argument from authority has no weight either. If you disagree with my explanation for why I believe numbered migrations are bad, I''d love to hear and learn from why. Till then, it''s all just blowing smoke.> > Best regards and hopes that you''ll find a Rails job soon, > Bill-- 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Marnen Laibow-Koser <lists-fsXkhYbjdPsEEoCn2XhGlw@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Bill Walton wrote: >> Hi Marnen, >> >> On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 3:46 PM, Marnen Laibow-Koser >> <lists-fsXkhYbjdPsEEoCn2XhGlw@public.gmane.org> wrote: >>> Bill Walton wrote: >>>> IME, there are good reasons to avoid time-stamped migrations. >>> >>> Not a one IMHO. >> >> You are certainly entitled to your opinion. But knowing as I do that >> you have no leadership experience in a software development role, your >> opinions on topics like this have no weight. > > Argument from authority has no weight either. If you disagree with my > explanation for why I believe numbered migrations are bad, I''d love to > hear and learn from why.I provided my reasoning in the post you''re responding to. You provided no ''explanation'' other than that time-stamped migrations are now the ''rails default''.> Till then, it''s all just blowing smoke.It''s very clear from a review of your posts that you''re simply playing with the counter. "I''m the x-highest poster on the Rails list." If anybody''s "blowing smoke" it''s you. And I''m going to start making that sure your record is clear with respect to people who use these easily manipulated stats to judge a job applicant''s stature in the community. You are, in my opinion, a threat to the Rails community. You prey on newbies; chastising, criticizing, and otherwise castigating. That''s wrong. So from now on, when you respond to a post, if it doesn''t offer real assistance, be assured that I will respond with a "marnen is an asshole. ignore him." Piss me off just a little more and I''ll make a new hobby out of going back into the archives and responding in retrospect. Ain''t technology great? ! Bill -- 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
Bill Walton wrote:> On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Marnen Laibow-Koser > <lists-fsXkhYbjdPsEEoCn2XhGlw@public.gmane.org> wrote: >>> You are certainly entitled to your opinion. �But knowing as I do that >>> you have no leadership experience in a software development role, your >>> opinions on topics like this have no weight. >> >> Argument from authority has no weight either. �If you disagree with my >> explanation for why I believe numbered migrations are bad, I''d love to >> hear and learn from why. > > I provided my reasoning in the post you''re responding to. You > provided no ''explanation'' other than that time-stamped migrations are > now the ''rails default''.Quite wrong. The very post you responded to -- available at http://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/211974#920846 -- contained a detailed explanation of why I think that time-stamped migrations are less brittle in a multiple-developer situation; perhaps you missed the latter half of the post when you replied to it. If you disagree with anything I said there, please tell me why -- I will listen with great interest to a logical argument. I am unimpressed by things like name-calling or argument from authority.> >> Till then, it''s all just blowing smoke. > > It''s very clear from a review of your posts that you''re simply playing > with the counter. "I''m the x-highest poster on the Rails list."I have absolutely no idea how many posts I''ve made here. I''m not playing with any counter.> If > anybody''s "blowing smoke" it''s you. And I''m going to start making > that sure your record is clear with respect to people who use these > easily manipulated stats to judge a job applicant''s stature in the > community. > > You are, in my opinion, a threat to the Rails community.I really don''t think I have enough power in the Rails community to be any threat to it at all, even if I were engaging in behavior that is destructive to the community, which I don''t believe I am. (I love the Rails community, and everything I have done in its context has been with a view to helping it, not threatening it.)> You prey on > newbies;I don''t "prey on" anyone. I try to help anyone I can.> chastising, criticizing, and otherwise castigating. That''s > wrong.What? It''s wrong to tell someone that he''s falling into common newbie errors, and to suggest a better way of doing things? When did that happen? I don''t get it.> So from now on, when you respond to a post, if it doesn''t > offer real assistance, be assured that I will respond with a "marnen > is an asshole. ignore him."Interesting that you should do that after saying, in the course of interviewing me, that my posts on the Rails list had helped convince you that I knew what I was doing with respect to Rails. Of course, things can certainly change.> Piss me off just a little more and I''ll > make a new hobby out of going back into the archives and responding in > retrospect.Well, post-stalking is generally considered poor form by most people I know, but if that''s what you want to do, I won''t try to stop you.> Ain''t technology great? !Technology is great at making sure the facts speak for themselves. Name-calling lasts forever on the Internet.> > BillBest, -- Marnen Laibow-Koser http://www.marnen.org marnen-sbuyVjPbboAdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org -- 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.