similar to: [patch] activesupport/core_ext/class cattr_reader/mattr_reader

Hello, i noticed some strange warnings when doing require ''active_support/core_ext'' with activesupport 3.0.6. If i do gem ''activesupport'', ''=3.0.5'' require ''active_support/core_ext'' then it works fine. Is this a bug in rails 3.0.6? More precisely, if i do $ irb -w > require

Allow to pass a block to cattr_reader . cattr_accessor already accepts defaults using a block. So just unify the interface. Example: class A cattr_reader(:defr) { ''default_reader_value'' } end A.defr # => ''default_reader_value'' https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/10848 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

Hi all, On versions of Ruby prior to 1.9, using update on an ActiveSupport::OrderedHash will not set the keys correctly. This means that it is not possible to iterate over the hash using each or get the array of keys. For example: hash = ActiveSupport::OrderedHash.new hash.update(:name => "Bob") # => #<OrderedHash {:name=>"Bob"}> hash.keys

Hi I must be slipping, but say I have a string that looks like: 3/11/2012 2:50:00 AM If I use the UTC timezone and ask it to parse this time, what would you expect the result to be? Personally, I''d say 3/11/2012 2:50:00 AM UTC Given this is the DST switchover date (for some places) this is an edge case. It''s the "spring forward" rule so 2:50 AM is 3:50... But

Hi everyone, I just created my first rails patch. It is a simple textile doc error requiring only a single word to be changed. https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994-ruby-on-rails/tickets/5779 I uploaded a .diff file. Not sure what to do now but lighthouse guide says I should ask on here for someone to take a look. Thank you for your time, fooledbyprimes Peoria, Illinois, USA --

Hi all, I just submitted a patch to 2-3-stable on lighthouse and wanted to bring it to folks general attention. https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994-ruby-on-rails/tickets/896-be-a-little-more-discerning-about-which-exceptions-to-handle My explanation is a bit long-winded, but here''s the motivation for the patch, as explained in the lighthouse ticket: Perhaps I should open

Hello everyone, I''m new in contributing and i saw in the contributing-guides, that i have to write an email at this list. I hope, that''s the right place for this. If it''s not, i''M really sorry.. ;) Could someone please give me feedback about this lighthouse-ticket?

In Rails 3 the only way to get for content captured with the content_for method in a view is to call yield from within a view. However, sometimes is it useful to get to this data from within a helper (for instance to provide a default value). Calling yield from within the helper method won''t work, and accessing the @_content_for variable directly is not encouraged. Proposed solution: add

Hi all. I''ve submitted a lighthouse ticket + patch so you can avoid having to repeatedly tell the subdomain method on ActionDispatch::Request how many elements your TLD has. https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994/tickets/5215-configurable-tld_length-for-subdomains Any thoughts? Good idea, bad idea? Thanks, Simon -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the

Hi, I''ve written a patch to fix a bug in except and only on ActiveRecord::Relation to lose any extensions added by earlier scopes. Since making a pull request is erroring on my on github, I''ve added the patch to lighthouse too. This can be added to the Rails 3.0.x branch as well. https://github.com/iain/rails/commit/a0bd5ba2fa38155ef6c036b256b08414eb9a2af1

A Rails 2.3.9 app with Active Record or Memcache session store will never send the session ID cookie to a client if the client doesn''t send any HTTP cookies in its requests. Rails integration tests didn''t catch this because they always send the HTTP_COOKIE header, even if it''s empty. This is a huge bug, as it can break keeping sessions on sites which don''t set

Lighthouse ticket: https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994-ruby-on-rails/tickets/4452 I have recently been working on some gems that utilize ActiveSupport::Cache and ran into some issues with the different implementations handling the same functionality differently. One of the issues was that I couldn''t rely on expiring entries with the :expires_in option. MemCacheStore takes this

I just posted this ticket in Lighthouse, but thought perhaps some discussion here would help point me in the right direction toward a solution. Here is a description of the problem (from the ticket - https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994-ruby-on-rails/tickets/6693-arel-union-does-not-support-order-or-limit) : > If we take two `ActiveRecord::Relations` and join them via `union`:

Hi all, I wanted to draw some attention to a couple of very small multibyte-related patches I believe should be included before Rails 3.0 RC1: * Use String#bytesize rather than String#length in exception templates: This is a simple case where string length is checked, but bytes is needed, so it breaks with string with multibyte chars.

Hi, when trying to migrate Signal to Rails 3 I tried to use the shorthand route for: match ''/projects/status(.:format)'' but it thrown an error because the controller was not specified. This happend because actually the shorthand routes only work with routes without optional parameters. The modification to support routes ending with a optional parameters is very simple, as can

I just upgraded to 2.1 and attempted to log in to my application and when this line is reached in my login action: redirect_to(index_url) I get the error "wrong number of arguments (0 for 1)" [stack trace below]. Here''s my route: map.index ''index'', :controller => ''e_simply'', :action => ''index'' I found

I''ve submitted a couple of patches in Ligththouse. Provide NoStore implementation of ActiveSupport::Cache::Store This patch provides a NoStore implementation of ActiveSupport::Cache::Store suitable for use in development and test environments where the code need to use the cache interface, but actually caching data is not desired.

Hello guys, I went into milestones page (https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994-ruby-on-rails/milestones) and found out that Rails 2.3.6 was due Jan 15, 2010. Does it mean all tickets in that milestone should be cleared first? If so, then I would pay attention to clear tickets in that bucket first. Thank you, Prem Sichanugrist (sikachu) -- You received this message because you are

The way Rails handles root nodes in JSON and XML serialization is inconsistent. This has been discussed before: https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994/tickets/2584-232-activeresource-json-doesnt-send-parameters-with-root-node This seems mostly taken care of with ActiveModel::Base.include_root_in_json, especially if/when it ends up in ActiveResource. However, there is also the issue of how

Hi all, There are two tickets in lighthouse that point to problems with the use of context() in RSpec: * conflict with JRuby: http://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645/tickets/728 * request context() be deprecated http://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645/tickets/713 As there are a lot of people (and libraries) that mix and match describe() and context(), I don''t plan to