On 7/6/06, David Heinemeier Hansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Create one new aggregated patch and mark the others as duplicate. We
can then apply the aggregate. We've done that in the past for both SQL
Server and Oracle too.
I've created a patch against #5670 which fixes many minor problems.
David,
If you'd like to setup every database and build a system that everyone
who does core development can rsync against, PDI.
Everyone on this list understands that broken code shouldn't be
checked in, but you're right, access is an issue. If you depend on
Oracle or DB2 or one of the other non-
On 7/8/06, Kevin Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I don't think we should reduce that sort of spam. The point is that
it's annoying so it gets fixed. Maybe we can put something in the
subject though so those of us who don't care about oracle and pgsql
breaking can filter it out?
I think it'd be
In an ideal world, code should never be checked into the repository
that breaks the unit tests, one of the points of continuous
integration is to encourage people not to check in broken code.
I develop Rails apps (with Site5) on my Powerbook at home, but they
are always deployed to Linux boxes, w
I don't think we should reduce that sort of spam. The point is that
it's annoying so it gets fixed. Maybe we can put something in the
subject though so those of us who don't care about oracle and pgsql
breaking can filter it out?
Kev
On 7/8/06, Blair Zajac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ideally, if
Ideally, if you could have the same person manage Oracle and other
databases, then you could have the Oracle tests run, and if they
pass, run the Postgresql tests. While this would delay the report of
Postgresql specific problems when there is also an Oracle specific
problem, it would redu
Having both Postgres and SQL server in addition to Oracle autotest results on the list would spam it pretty much, I think. What do others think?On 7/8/06,
Rick Bradley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We have some interest in providing the same service for Postgres --would you be so kind as to forward m
* Michael A. Schoen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060707 22:18]:
> Tom: let me know if you'd like a copy of the script I use to test
> against the Oracle adapter after every checkin. It's not very fancy, but
> it does a good job spamming rails-core when stuff breaks. ;-)
We have some interest in providin
On 7/8/06, Ryan Tomayko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Tom has arguably contributed every bit as much if not more to the
apapter as myself so I'd like to nominate him. He was probably the
right guy for the job months ago.
That's very gracious of you Ryan, but don't underestimate your own
contribut
On 7/8/06, Jeremy Kemper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jul 7, 2006, at 6:51 PM, Ryan Tomayko wrote:
> On 7/6/06, Tom Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> There are a fair few issues against the SQL Server db adapter that
>> I'd
>> like to see fixed. There are also a couple of features I'd like to
On 7/8/06, Michael A. Schoen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jeremy Kemper wrote:
> So, Tom, you looking to be a bug magnet? ;)
Tom: let me know if you'd like a copy of the script I use to test
against the Oracle adapter after every checkin. It's not very fancy, but
it does a good job spamming rails-
Jeremy Kemper wrote:
So, Tom, you looking to be a bug magnet? ;)
Tom: let me know if you'd like a copy of the script I use to test
against the Oracle adapter after every checkin. It's not very fancy, but
it does a good job spamming rails-core when stuff breaks. ;-)
_
On Jul 7, 2006, at 6:51 PM, Ryan Tomayko wrote:
On 7/6/06, Tom Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There are a fair few issues against the SQL Server db adapter that
I'd
like to see fixed. There are also a couple of features I'd like to
add, but don't really want to until these bugs have been fix
On 7/6/06, Tom Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There are a fair few issues against the SQL Server db adapter that I'd
like to see fixed. There are also a couple of features I'd like to
add, but don't really want to until these bugs have been fixed. It's
time to show SQL Server some love!
I'd l
Many of these outstanding issues have patches against that need
reviewing, testing or just generally cleaning up. I'm more than
willing to go through these patches and do this work, but what's the
best way to get them actually committed to trunk?
Create one new aggregated patch and mark the oth
There are a fair few issues against the SQL Server db adapter that I'd
like to see fixed. There are also a couple of features I'd like to
add, but don't really want to until these bugs have been fixed. It's
time to show SQL Server some love!
Many of these outstanding issues have patches against
16 matches
Mail list logo
