Forum: Ruby Next stable 1.9.x

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.
770048af205ed307b8cf35ae2282ee2f?d=identicon&s=25 Michael Malone (Guest)
on 2009-03-04 23:05
(Received via mailing list)
Does anyone know if there's a projected timeline for the next 1.9.x
stable release (1.9.2)?

=======================================================================
This email, including any attachments, is only for the intended
addressee.  It is subject to copyright, is confidential and may be
the subject of legal or other privilege, none of which is waived or
lost by reason of this transmission.
If the receiver is not the intended addressee, please accept our
apologies, notify us by return, delete all copies and perform no
other act on the email.
Unfortunately, we cannot warrant that the email has not been
 altered or corrupted during transmission.
=======================================================================
83ca41657a99b65d99889abe712ba5e2?d=identicon&s=25 Jason Roelofs (Guest)
on 2009-03-04 23:36
(Received via mailing list)
I hope it's quick. One of the extensions I work with and on (Rice)
dies horribly with 1.9.1 when exceptions are thrown, and works
wonderfully under the current trunk (1.9.2dev).

This is the best information I could find on this question:

http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/versions/show/11

Jason

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 5:02 PM, Michael Malone
703fbc991fd63e0e1db54dca9ea31b53?d=identicon&s=25 Robert Dober (Guest)
on 2009-03-05 22:17
(Received via mailing list)
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 11:02 PM, Michael Malone
<michael.malone@tait.co.nz> wrote:
> other act on the email.
> Unfortunately, we cannot warrant that the email has not been
> altered or corrupted during transmission.
Meaning, we should ignore this?

Sorry no info on your question, but I could not resist whacking at
those "legal obligations".

Cheers
Robert
770048af205ed307b8cf35ae2282ee2f?d=identicon&s=25 Michael Malone (Guest)
on 2009-03-05 22:29
(Received via mailing list)
Robert Dober wrote:
>> lost by reason of this transmission.
>
> Cheers
> Robert
>
>
Yeah, our mail server attaches them to every outgoing message.
Corporations: Adding unenforceable cruft to untraceable messages since
1992

Michael

And here's another for you:

=======================================================================
This email, including any attachments, is only for the intended
addressee.  It is subject to copyright, is confidential and may be
the subject of legal or other privilege, none of which is waived or
lost by reason of this transmission.
If the receiver is not the intended addressee, please accept our
apologies, notify us by return, delete all copies and perform no
other act on the email.
Unfortunately, we cannot warrant that the email has not been
 altered or corrupted during transmission.
=======================================================================
149379873fe2cb70e550c6bff8fedd0c?d=identicon&s=25 Jeff Schwab (Guest)
on 2009-03-05 22:55
(Received via mailing list)
Michael Malone wrote:
> Robert Dober wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 11:02 PM, Michael Malone
>> <michael.malone@tait.co.nz> wrote:

>>> This email, including any attachments, is only for the intended
>>> addressee.  It is subject to copyright, is confidential and may be
[...]

>> Sorry no info on your question, but I could not resist whacking at
>> those "legal obligations".

> Yeah, our mail server attaches them to every outgoing message.
> Corporations: Adding unenforceable cruft to untraceable messages since 1992

If you put a "-- " line at the end of your email, it might at least make
the cruft look like an ordinary sig.
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.