Forum: Typo 1.1 or 1.0, choose now!

Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
Piers C. (Guest)
on 2006-03-30 10:13
(Received via mailing list)
After further testing of the rails_1_1 branch, it seems I was rather
to sanguine about how well it works with Rails 1.0. Essentially, it
doesn't, I don't know why, and working out why is going to be HARD.

So, we're faced with a choice: we can move the typo trunk to a point
where we *require* Rails 1.1, or we can wait until we come up with a
fix for 1.0.

My gut feeling (especially given the speed with which the hosting
companies have made the switch to 1.1) is that we should just move
over to requiring 1.1 as soon as possible; there's lots of goodies in
there that I want to use for typo; we'd probably be going to 1.1 only
pretty swiftly any way.

If we do this, we'd tag revision 971 (the current trunk HEAD) as
'good_with_1_0' or something and just move on.

What does the panel think?
Josh S. (Guest)
on 2006-03-30 10:19
(Received via mailing list)
I'm fine with running on Rails 1.1.  Aas long as Typo is well-behaved
it makes no never-mind to me.

--
Josh S.
http://blog.hasmanythrough.com
Steve L. (Guest)
on 2006-03-30 10:19
(Received via mailing list)
+1 for 1.1 :-)
Rob S. (Guest)
on 2006-03-30 10:19
(Received via mailing list)
+1 for 1.1.

- Rob
David R. (Guest)
on 2006-03-30 10:28
(Received via mailing list)
Another vote for 1.1 only from here in. Surely we can provide
properinstructions on installing a local copy of Rails 1.0 for those
peoplewho need it?
david richardson--www.channel200.net
Steven S. (Guest)
on 2006-03-30 10:56
(Received via mailing list)
I go with the requirement for 1.1 which is where most of the hosting
companies appear to be moving to rapidly.
Koen Van der Auwera (Guest)
on 2006-03-30 11:11
(Received via mailing list)
+1 for 1.1 :)
Piers C. (Guest)
on 2006-03-30 12:03
(Received via mailing list)
Piers C. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> writes:

> over to requiring 1.1 as soon as possible; there's lots of goodies in
> there that I want to use for typo; we'd probably be going to 1.1 only
> pretty swiftly any way.
>
> If we do this, we'd tag revision 971 (the current trunk HEAD) as
> 'good_with_1_0' or something and just move on.
>
> What does the panel think?

Actually, we might not have to choose. The latest patch on the
rails_1_1 branch seems to be *substantially* more robust in Rails 1.0
development mode. And it's conceptually nicer too.
Victor J. (Guest)
on 2006-03-30 12:03
(Received via mailing list)
I don't know if I have any say, but +1 for 1.1 :)

Victor
Denis L. (Guest)
on 2006-03-30 12:33
(Received via mailing list)
Hi Piers,
i'd like to know if you are available to work on multiblog hosting
solution based on Typo. I know that you already build it when replacing
the setting withe the blog object. All work can of course be used for
typo afterwards. so working on typo and beeing paied can be nice , no?

if you have some time free 2-3 days a week , can you send me your
tariff, day/work, hour/work and the way you want to work.

I'll send you a mind map (freemind on mac os x) with the requested
features to develop ( essentielly multiblog with central commenting
modération, multi role user with blog assignement, a small media center
and a global aggrgation portal for all blog)

If the agency accept the work, the wark will begin very soon, like next
week.

Best regards
Lamotte Denis aka Lanfeust
Piers C. (Guest)
on 2006-03-30 13:07
(Received via mailing list)
Denis L. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> writes:

> features to develop ( essentielly multiblog with central commenting
> modération, multi role user with blog assignement, a small media center
> and a global aggrgation portal for all blog)
>
> If the agency accept the work, the wark will begin very soon, like next
> week.

Somehow, I don't think you expected this to go to the list.

Sadly, I don't really have the free time at the moment; I'm committed
to another client for at least the next month.

--
Piers C. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid>
http://www.bofh.org.uk/
Jón B. (Guest)
on 2006-03-30 16:05
(Received via mailing list)
I think that requiring 1.1 could give so many benefits. 1.1 includes
so many great upgrades and added functionality. I for example see many
ways on how using RJS can further seperate funtionality and theme and
thus making theme building even more simpler than it is now.

But the big question is..... When is the next major release? Is the
beta for 3.0.0 a year away or a month. I see how it can be simpler to
be able to say that version 2.6 is 1.0 supported and version 3.0 is
only 1.1+.

But that doesn't work if eveyone has to wait for 9 months. 1.2 will
propably be out by then.

On 3/30/06, Piers C. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> over to requiring 1.1 as soon as possible; there's lots of goodies in
> http://www.bofh.org.uk/
> _______________________________________________
> Typo-list mailing list
> removed_email_address@domain.invalid
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/typo-list
>


--
--------------
Jon Gretar B.
http://www.jongretar.net/
Kevin B. (Guest)
on 2006-03-30 21:26
(Received via mailing list)
The next release is 4.0 (we're skipping 3.0 to avoid confusion with a
CMS called Typo3) and we're gearing up to release it in the very near
future.
Nicolai R. (Guest)
on 2006-03-30 22:06
(Received via mailing list)
2006/3/30, Kevin B. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid>:
> The next release is 4.0 (we're skipping 3.0 to avoid confusion with a
> CMS called Typo3) and we're gearing up to release it in the very near
> future.

Which is also very awkward because they just released their version 4 of
Typo3.
Well, I can't help it. ;-)
Piers C. (Guest)
on 2006-03-30 22:48
(Received via mailing list)
Codeblogger <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> writes:

> 2006/3/30, Kevin B. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid>:
>> The next release is 4.0 (we're skipping 3.0 to avoid confusion with a
>> CMS called Typo3) and we're gearing up to release it in the very near
>> future.
>
> Which is also very awkward because they just released their version 4 of
> Typo3.
> Well, I can't help it. ;-)

Are they still calling it Typo3? Or are we going to get a
switchtoweresque cease and desist order?
Jason B. (Guest)
on 2006-03-30 23:25
(Received via mailing list)
Piers C. wrote:

>
>Are they still calling it Typo3? Or are we going to get a
>switchtoweresque cease and desist order?
>
>

It looks like the RC's are Typo3 4 RC2 and so on so we should be okay
unless they were feeling very picky about it.

Regards,
Jason
Ernie O. (Guest)
on 2006-03-31 05:31
(Received via mailing list)
I'm on 977 as of this afternoon and its working OK.  Are there any spots
that are known not to work after 971 with 1.0?
The upgrade to 1.1 is simply the "gem install rails
--include-dependencies"
and updating typo is just an "svn update" away.  Is there a chicken-egg
in
any of this?  Should the recommended instructions be...

svn checkout -r 977
gem install rails --include-dependencies
svn update

or something like that?
Kevin B. (Guest)
on 2006-03-31 05:52
(Received via mailing list)
AFAIK typo trunk should work with Rails 1.0. In testing it does, and
I haven't heard of any issues so far. So I would recommend svn
updating (or checking out), then upgrading rails (as upgrading rails
first will break an existing typo blog).
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.