Yes. Do an undef before it. Most of the warnings do not come from
rails itself but from some of its libraries (active record, action
pack, etc).
Here's the full page of warnings I get on starting a server, for
example, with latest rails 1.1.6:
./script/../config/boot.rb:28:Warning: require_gem
On 2/23/07, Michael Koziarski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > Starting Monday I'll be working for myself and one of the things I'm
> > looking forward to is working on ActiveRecord more.
>
> Congratulations, it's a bunch of fun :)
Will the change make the Abstract Adapter really abstract whil
Second to this...
On 2/23/07, Rob Sanheim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Can we have this applied? For production logging it would be great if
> you could cleanly apply formatting or override as desired...plus the
> way Logger is overridden is just not friendly.
>
> - Rob
>
> On 2/18/07,
On Feb 24, 2007, at 5:36 AM, Mislav Marohnić wrote:
> On 2/23/07, Michael Koziarski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Starting Monday I'll be working for myself and one of the things I'm
> > looking forward to is working on ActiveRecord more.
>
> Congratulations, it's a bunch of fun :)
>
> Will the
I'm working a little project to clean up the rails trac system. I
found a ton of tickets for an old app called i2 in the rails repo. I
believe it has been abandoned and all these tickets are sitting there
with modification dates over 1 year ago. I was just wondering if
anyone would have a problem
On 2/25/07, Mislav Marohnić <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/23/07, Michael Koziarski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Starting Monday I'll be working for myself and one of the things I'm
> > > looking forward to is working on ActiveRecord more.
> >
> > Congratulations, it's a bunch of fun :)
> I'm working a little project to clean up the rails trac system. I
> found a ton of tickets for an old app called i2 in the rails repo. I
> believe it has been abandoned and all these tickets are sitting there
> with modification dates over 1 year ago. I was just wondering if
> anyone would have
Now that the trunk is on its way to rails 2.0, is it still a good
idea to run apps off the trunk?
Right now the app generator is broken (and I couldn't fix some of it).
In the past I've run trunk apps with little to no breakage. Will the
road to 2.0 be a bit more rocky?
--~--~-~--~-
I was gonna nudge you guys about #6175, before that, I was gonna
download the patch and test it again.
But... when I attempt to download it, track says it doesn't exist.
The previous patch file is mssing too. The others seem ok.
What the two missing have in common is a "+" char in the name. M
Koz, do you mind me or other volunteers going through unprocessed
patches and tagging/filing them were they belong? Or should this be
for core members only.
I'm just looking for a way to help process the good number of patches
in Trac.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You r
> Koz, do you mind me or other volunteers going through unprocessed
> patches and tagging/filing them were they belong? Or should this be
> for core members only.
>
> I'm just looking for a way to help process the good number of patches
> in Trac.
The more the merrier! There's a lot of stuff in
On Feb 24, 4:30 pm, "Michael Koziarski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The more the merrier! There's a lot of stuff in there which should
> be triaged, things like no tests, no longer applies cleanly,
> introduces failing tests etc. We have full history, so the worst you
> can do is offend so
On 2/24/07, Caio Chassot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Now that the trunk is on its way to rails 2.0, is it still a good
> idea to run apps off the trunk?
>
> Right now the app generator is broken (and I couldn't fix some of it).
>
> In the past I've run trunk apps with little to no breakage. Wil
> I'm running on edge. There aren't any major breaking changes that I
> can think of right now. But as always, you need good unit tests :)
>
> However, 2.0 will see some more drastic changes, so you should keep
> one eye on the changelogs (or subscribe to the various blogs reporting
> on edge fe
> Generally speaking I track stable, only moving to edge if there's a
> big feature I'm after. While we'll always do our best not to bust up
> edge too badly, you're kinda crazy if you're using it 'just because'
> ;).
Zing! I actually use edge because of the refactoring to
ActionController::R
On 2007-02-24, at 20:54 , Michael Koziarski wrote:
> Generally speaking I track stable, only moving to edge if there's a
> big feature I'm after. While we'll always do our best not to bust up
> edge too badly, you're kinda crazy if you're using it 'just because'
> ;).
I was using trunk before
On 2/24/07, Anthony Eden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Following up on Koz's suggestion to discuss how plugin developers are
> monkey patching AR, I'd like to share some of things my coworkers and
> I have done.
>
> 1.) Truncate. Currently implemented in ActiveWarehouse ETL for MySQL.
truncate a
> Do you think maybe as work on 2.0 progresses, it might be a good idea
> to maintain a branch to merge stable new features in, along side with
> a not-so-stable trunk?
We definitely don't want to have such a long gap between releases
again, to this end we've already done a few things differently
> Just want to poke a little and remind core about my clean logger patch
> http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/7106. It still patches cleanly so
> it'd be cool if it could be applied now while the getting is good.
> Thanks!
Applied, thanks for the patch.
--
Cheers
Koz
--~--~-~--~~
On 2/24/07, Michael Koziarski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 2/24/07, Anthony Eden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Following up on Koz's suggestion to discuss how plugin developers are
> > monkey patching AR, I'd like to share some of things my coworkers and
> > I have done.
> >
> > 1.) Trun
Hi,
I've been trying to DRY up my models in my current Rails project by
adding a dash of the very useful with_scope. However, I quickly
realized that when nesting with_scopes the outermost :joins are
forgotten. This somewhat limits the extent to which I can exploit the
use of with_scope.
Is ther
> Could someone check that, and try to rescue the patch from the dead?
> I don't seem to have a local copy.
Seems trac 10.3 has a bug with cgi escaping, so don't upload any files
with spaces in them for the time being.
I've de-ghosted that patch for you. give it a quick checkover and re-nudge u
> Following up on Koz's suggestion to discuss how plugin developers are
> monkey patching AR, I'd like to share some of things my coworkers and
> I have done.
Calling all plugin authors. If you've been frustrated when adding
functionality to Active Record, speak here, or forever ... yeah :)
--
On 2/24/07, Josh Bassett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Is there any way to preserve :joins through a nested with_scope stack?
>
> Perhaps someone can shed some light on the reasoning behind this
> situation.
Danger, danger! with_scope considered harmful. with_scope is not a generic,
do-it-all SQ
Has this been committed into the svn.rubyonrails.org repository now?
I've just tried
ActionMailer::Base.register_template_extension('haml')
in console on edge (6225) and get a NoMethodError. I've checked source
as well and that concurs.
Cheers,
Spongy
On Feb 15, 3:52 am, Jamis Buck <[EMAIL
25 matches
Mail list logo
