Mark, Martin, thanks for the replies. Here's what I've discovered...hope this helps others:
1 - ruby-191-p376 does not work with merb 1.1.0.pre. From another thread, it seems this is a problem with methopara. 2 - ruby-191-p243 seems to work well. 3 - You cannot have merb gems 1.1 installed along with merb 1.1.0.pre gems. merb picks up on the 1.1 gems regardless of what your GemFile says. 4 - With the above, merb 1.1.0.pre from git master (HEAD) is working. Thanks, Jon On Dec 30, 10:17 am, Martin Gamsjaeger <[email protected]> wrote: > Sorry, but since prerelease gems haven't always been possible, there > was no way to avoid switching from 1.1 to 1.1.0.pre at some time, if > we want the comfort of having prerelease gems. I'd suggest you remove > the old 1.1 gems from your machine(s). 1.1.0.pre (master branch) is > considered to be the most stable version. Also, to avoid problems with > other system gems, why not switch your app to bundler? > > In any case, 1.1.0.pre seems to work quite alright for me and some > others, and I guess that partly answers your last question too. You > see, we gladly accept patches when someone finds a bug and a fix for > it, but none of us seems to have a lot of time nowadays to put > additional work into merb that doesn't immediately fix a problem we're > experiencing with our own apps. I may speak primarily for myself here, > but I'd guess that to be true for others too. > > That said, please do contribute patches, from small to big, I can > promise they all will be considered and reviewed. Merb is quite stable > as it is imho, but we should make it even more so. Once the biggest > outstanding issues are solved, 1.1 can be released. However, don't ask > me about a specific date for that. Merb is now completely community > driven. If someone wants to fix a bug or add a feature, go ahead and > send a pull request, drop into #merb on freenode or post to this > group. Don't give up if you don't get a response for some time, > probably everyone is busy with something else too. > > cheers > snusnu > > > > On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 09:38, MarkMT <[email protected]> wrote: > > Jon, > > > According to gemcutter -http://gemcutter.org/gems/merb/versions/1.1.0.pre > > , the 1.1.0.pre release was made on November 17, so I suppose the > > latest from github on that date would be a fair guess - > >http://github.com/merb/merb/commits/master. > > > That said. I installed the HEAD version from github just yesterday, > > and haven't yet noticed the kind of problems you describe, although > > I'm on ruby 1.8.7 p72, so the problems you're seeing may be specific > > to 1.9. > > > Mark. > > > Jon Hancock wrote: > >> I updated merb with the latest from github, installs as "1.1.0.pre". > >> Now its busted. I'm using system installed gems and still have the > >> old gems which I installed a few months ago which are labelled > >> "1.1". I would very much like to know the git commit id for the old > >> 1.1 install so I can install a working merb on a production machine. > >> Any ideas? Also, any info as to when we can expect github's merb HEAD > >> to be in better working order? > >> thanks, Jon > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "merb" 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 > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/merb?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "merb" 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/merb?hl=en.
