Back to Rails 1.1.x!

Rails
1

I’m tired of fvcking around trying to get Rails 1.2.x to work. My named
routes wouldn’t work or get generated correctly. The upgrade docs made
no mention that rubygems also needed to be updated (which causes many
problems if rake update is called). I could find no docs about how the
completely rewritten routing is “stricter.” After, what, 2 RC’s I’m
surprised at this crap. I removed 1.2 and reverted to 1.1.x and will
maybe figure it out at a later date. What a big disappointment.

Joe

2

Hi Joe,

After, what, 2 RC’s I’m surprised at this crap.

Could you point me to the tickets you opened after trying your
application on these two release candidates?

I removed 1.2 and reverted to 1.1.x and will
maybe figure it out at a later date. What a big disappointment.

No one is forcing your hand to upgrade. There are Rails applications
still happily chugging along on Rails 0.13 or earlier.

3

DHH wrote:

Hi Joe,

After, what, 2 RC’s I’m surprised at this crap.

Could you point me to the tickets you opened after trying your
application on these two release candidates?

I removed 1.2 and reverted to 1.1.x and will
maybe figure it out at a later date. What a big disappointment.

No one is forcing your hand to upgrade. There are Rails applications
still happily chugging along on Rails 0.13 or earlier.

I probably will open some tickets. I figured that all sorts of tests
were in place to check if BC was broke when routing was rewritten. Or
after two RCs almost all of the major issues would’ve been found out
(which is one of the reasons I waited–for final). I did find several
others who had experienced the same problem as me, but couldn’t find any
real solutions (just David Black saying it had caused some “amusement”).
I’ll probably take another crack at it when I’m less fuzzy-headed and
pissy.

Joe

4

I probably will open some tickets.

I figured that all sorts of tests
were in place to check if BC was broke when routing was rewritten.

Lots of tests are in place. You can see them all for yourself. They
usually reside in the test/ directory of each framework. Do they cover
every possible edge case? No. Will they ever? Probably not.

Or after two RCs almost all of the major issues would’ve been found out
(which is one of the reasons I waited–for final).

Ah, so you’re upset that others didn’t do the work you couldn’t be
bothered to? The reason we have release candidates is exactly because
the core team is now happy with the framework for their use and are
inviting others to help uncover edge cases from different usage. The
more people who choose to “wait for the final”, the less likely that
all edge cases are uncovered. But few have the audacity to opt-out of
the process and bemoan its lack of results at the same time. That
truly takes talent.

I’ll probably take another crack at it when I’m less fuzzy-headed and
pissy.

Hold that thought. Better yet, put it on a post-it next to your enter
key. This might lead you to ponder how much fuzzy, pissy thinking
you’re willing to put into the public records as examples of your open
source contributions. The hang-over tomorrow might be slightly less
severe.

5

DHH wrote:

I probably will open some tickets.

I figured that all sorts of tests
were in place to check if BC was broke when routing was rewritten.

Lots of tests are in place. You can see them all for yourself. They
usually reside in the test/ directory of each framework. Do they cover
every possible edge case? No. Will they ever? Probably not.

Or after two RCs almost all of the major issues would’ve been found out
(which is one of the reasons I waited–for final).

Ah, so you’re upset that others didn’t do the work you couldn’t be
bothered to? The reason we have release candidates is exactly because
the core team is now happy with the framework for their use and are
inviting others to help uncover edge cases from different usage. The
more people who choose to “wait for the final”, the less likely that
all edge cases are uncovered. But few have the audacity to opt-out of
the process and bemoan its lack of results at the same time. That
truly takes talent.

Oh come on, I don’t get “final” software from other places and then
expect I’ll be having to do a bunch of debugging, ticket submitting,
etc. I’ve helped out with prior RCs and many bug reports before, just
didn’t have time this time around. At any rate, this issue has been
identified NOW. Sounds like a doc patch and probably error raising will
resolve it.

Joe