Rail 2.0 release estimate?

was there any talk at railsconf or any talk in the chat rooms about
rails 2.0 release. i seems they chose the new version number because
it won’t be backwards compatible with 1.x sites.

On 6/24/07, plewizard [email protected] wrote:

was there any talk at railsconf or any talk in the chat rooms about
rails 2.0 release. i seems they chose the new version number because
it won’t be backwards compatible with 1.x sites.

There’s no release date set. There will most likely be a round of RC
releases before 2.0 drops though.


Rick O.
http://lighthouseapp.com
http://weblog.techno-weenie.net
http://mephistoblog.com

On Jun 24, 2007, at 6:30 PM, Rick O. wrote:

Rick O.
http://lighthouseapp.com
http://weblog.techno-weenie.net
http://mephistoblog.com

What about the part of the question on whether the 2.0 release will
be backwardly compatible with 1.x?

Actually, I think that the more interesting way to phrase that is
whether 1.2.x will be forwardly compatible with 2.0?

I have a 1.1.6 and soon to be 1.2.2 site in production. (The 1.2.3
bugfix for ruby1.8.6 is probably going to replace 1.2.2 before it’s
really live.) I know that I’m occasionally tripped up by trying to
use something from 1.2.x that doesn’t exist in 1.1.6, but that hasn’t
yet overwhelmed my expectation of effort to move that application to
1.2.x. I know 1.2.x isn’t backwardly compatible with 1.1.x and I
wouldn’t expect 1.(n+1).x to be with any 1.n.x. However, 1.n.x is
typically going to work in 1.(n+1).0, but the effort move from 1.x
(of anything) to 2.0 can be almost anything.

I haven’t tracked Edge since the pre-1.1 days when I wanted to trade
my hand-rolled polymorphic associations for a built-in implementation
so I don’t have a good foundation for building an expectation of the
1.2.x to 2.0 transition for an existing application.

-Rob

Rob B. http://agileconsultingllc.com
[email protected]

It will definitely not be plug-compatible. There were many changes
reported at RailsConf that would change how things work. There are
warnings in 1.2.3 for at least some of them such as :class_name when
defining associations. There were changes to the REST routing, soap
web services are being moved to a plugin in favor of REST in the
core, etc. You can always create an edge play area and do some of
the porting early to reduce the impact.

Michael

On Jun 25, 2007, at 00:30 , Rick O. wrote:

On 6/24/07, plewizard [email protected] wrote:

was there any talk at railsconf or any talk in the chat rooms about
rails 2.0 release. i seems they chose the new version number because
it won’t be backwards compatible with 1.x sites.

There’s no release date set. There will most likely be a round of RC
releases before 2.0 drops though.

And a 2.0.1 immediately after :wink:


Jakob S. - http://mentalized.net

Michael L. wrote:

There are
warnings in 1.2.3 for at least some of them such as :class_name when
defining associations.

Where can I find more information on the future of :class_name? I just
used this option in my 1.2.3 app so now I’m curious.

If you just use :class_name without :foreign_key you get the message
stating that in 2.0 they are changing the default from
<class_name>_id to <association_name>_id.

The new default makes more sense than the old default, but for 1.2
they are recommending that you set it explicitly so it will not break
when upgrading.

Michael

This forum is not affiliated to the Ruby language, Ruby on Rails framework, nor any Ruby applications discussed here.

| Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Remote Ruby Jobs