On Tue, November 15, 2011 09:42, Ken Collins wrote: > > I have seen previous tiny version releases break the SQL > Server adapter. Which to me points out two things, the > scope and size of the rails stack and the nasty hacks I > have had to do to pass the ActiveRecord test suite. > > In general I agree that tiny version releases should not > need release candidate gems. On the flip side, I > appreciate that core is making an effort to warn upfront > too and I think the RC process has value. In my case, it > is easy to automate my tests on that git tag or a bundled > download. > >
Versioning software can be a bureaucratic nightmare. It can also be a swamp in which no-one knows exactly what it means. To avoid the latter without advocating the former I think it is reasonable to have some idea of what the core team presently hold as sufficient cause to change each of the Major, the Minor and the Patch numbers for RoR. Is there a guide to this criteria somewhere? -- *** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** James B. Byrne mailto:[email protected] Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" 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/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
