On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 23:15, Nathan Weizenbaum <[email protected]> wrote:
> > First, Sass now natively supports Rack. The details are up on my blog here: > http://nex-3.com/posts/88-sass-supports-rack . In addition, I made some > changes and deprecations to the internal API for dealing with SassScript > Color objects, so if you have custom Sass functions that depend on those you > should look into making sure they're compatible. I have a problem with Haml versioning. Why are such major features and some deprecations added to a minor release? If I wrote some code and deployed it with Haml 2.2.13, keeping the version constraint as "~> 2.2.13", I don't expect it to suddenly spew out deprecation notices if I update to a newer 2.2.x version. And yes, I did write a couple of functions dealing with Color objects. I don't want that code to break or raise warnings if it didn't in the first place. Same problem with 2.0.10. We wrote an application with 2.0.9; months later we updated the gem on the server to 2.0.10 hoping we are being a good ruby citizen and getting bugfixes, but that in fact brought our service down, since the `haml_tag` return value was not only deprecated in that release, but designed to raise an error: $ echo "= haml_tag :foo" | haml _2.0.9_ <foo></foo> $ echo "= haml_tag :foo" | haml _2.0.10_ Haml error I don't expect new features and new deprecations in minor releases. New features mean new bugs. (OK, stuff like XHML5 doctype doesn't warrant a 2.x release.) And what happened to 2.1? That release should have had the `haml_tag` raising an error on rendering the return value. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Haml" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=.
