Menu
▾
▴
rails-devel
|
From: Erik V. <eri...@xs...> - 2011-11-19 08:09:48
|
It's my intention to keep maintaining and possibly even extending Rails 1.x, until it has become absolutely clear to everyone that Rails 2.0 is a worthy successor and Rails 1.x has become a dead end. I'm undecided about what I'm going to do after that point. Erik. > -----Original Message----- > From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...] > Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2011 7:02 AM > To: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game > Subject: Re: [Rails-devel] Shares and certificates (was: Further 1835 testing) > > Erik: > A general remark first regarding the Rails 2.0 development: > > It is already quite often not possible to automatic (=merge without manual > intervention) rebase the 2.0 branch onto the Rails 1.x master as the changes > to the base elements (states, moves, portfolios) are too substantial. So I can > only merge commits one-by-one, which takes some effort. > > Most likely I will not be able (auto-)merge any of your changes regarding > shares into the 2.0 branch. And due to the nature of changes it will be easier > to implement the changes directly instead of the trying to merge the 1.x > commits. > > So from my point of view I recommend to keep your changes minimal in able > to fix 1835. However your decision will mainly depend on how long you > expect to keep developing in Rails 1.x. > > Unfortunately I am currently not able to give a clear commitment when Rails > 2.0 will run without errors. > Of the design/refactoring changes for the initial 2.0 I think 90% are in place, > however from the testing/bug-hunting I guess only 10% are done, but the > latter figure is difficult to predict. > > I will provide more feedback on your proposal later this weekend. > > Stefan |
|
From: Stefan F. <ste...@we...> - 2011-11-19 09:05:53
|
On Saturday, November 19, 2011 09:09:42 am Erik Vos wrote: > It's my intention to keep maintaining and possibly even extending Rails > 1.x, until it has become absolutely clear to everyone that Rails 2.0 is a > worthy successor and Rails 1.x has become a dead end. I'm undecided about > what I'm going to do after that point. Erik, My fear is that by binding yourself to the definition "absolutely clear to everyone" you will never be able to stop maintaining Rails 1.x. You are handing out veto rights freely... ;-) Maybe should stop maintaining if you are yourself convinced of your condition, which will still very difficult to achieve. I have and had no intention to maneuver you into a dead-end and it would be a pity is this happens. So if there is anything i can do (better) to avoid that, please let me know. Stefan > > Erik. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...] > > Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2011 7:02 AM > > To: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game > > Subject: Re: [Rails-devel] Shares and certificates (was: Further 1835 > > testing) > > > Erik: > > A general remark first regarding the Rails 2.0 development: > > > > It is already quite often not possible to automatic (=merge without > > manual intervention) rebase the 2.0 branch onto the Rails 1.x master as > > the > > changes > > > to the base elements (states, moves, portfolios) are too substantial. So > > I > > can > > > only merge commits one-by-one, which takes some effort. > > > > Most likely I will not be able (auto-)merge any of your changes regarding > > shares into the 2.0 branch. And due to the nature of changes it will be > > easier > > > to implement the changes directly instead of the trying to merge the 1.x > > commits. > > > > So from my point of view I recommend to keep your changes minimal in able > > to fix 1835. However your decision will mainly depend on how long you > > expect to keep developing in Rails 1.x. > > > > Unfortunately I am currently not able to give a clear commitment when > > Rails > > > 2.0 will run without errors. > > Of the design/refactoring changes for the initial 2.0 I think 90% are in > > place, > > > however from the testing/bug-hunting I guess only 10% are done, but the > > latter figure is difficult to predict. > > > > I will provide more feedback on your proposal later this weekend. > > > > Stefan > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > --- All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure > contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, > security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this > data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d > _______________________________________________ > Rails-devel mailing list > Rai...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel |
|
From: Erik V. <eri...@xs...> - 2011-11-19 11:04:27
|
Stefan, I clearly have expressed myself a bit too strongly. Surely I will stop maintaining Rails 1.x when it's clear that it would no longer serve any purpose (although keeping myself busy is a potential purpose). I just can't tell now to what extent I expect to be able to work with Rails 2.0 in the future. Possible inhibitors include: - old age (I'm 65 now), - inability to grasp Rails 2.0 (unlikely at this time), - don't like Rails 2.0 (unlikely but not unthinkable), - my other hobbies and/or my grandchildren manage to move Rails to the bottom of my priority list (no clue on this one). Because of family matters, I currently don't have the time to do much else on Rails than bug fixing and minor improvements. I'm not following your work (yet). I hope that all will change sometime in 2012. Erik. > -----Original Message----- > From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...] > Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2011 10:09 AM > To: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game > Subject: Re: [Rails-devel] Rails 1.x > > On Saturday, November 19, 2011 09:09:42 am Erik Vos wrote: > > It's my intention to keep maintaining and possibly even extending > > Rails 1.x, until it has become absolutely clear to everyone that Rails > > 2.0 is a worthy successor and Rails 1.x has become a dead end. I'm > > undecided about what I'm going to do after that point. > > Erik, > My fear is that by binding yourself to the definition "absolutely clear to > everyone" you will never be able to stop maintaining Rails 1.x. > You are handing out veto rights freely... ;-) Maybe should stop maintaining if > you are yourself convinced of your condition, which will still very difficult to > achieve. > I have and had no intention to maneuver you into a dead-end and it would > be a pity is this happens. So if there is anything i can do (better) to avoid that, > please let me know. > Stefan > > > > > Erik. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...] > > > Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2011 7:02 AM > > > To: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game > > > Subject: Re: [Rails-devel] Shares and certificates (was: Further > > > 1835 > > > > testing) > > > > > Erik: > > > A general remark first regarding the Rails 2.0 development: > > > > > > It is already quite often not possible to automatic (=merge without > > > manual intervention) rebase the 2.0 branch onto the Rails 1.x master > > > as the > > > > changes > > > > > to the base elements (states, moves, portfolios) are too > > > substantial. So I > > > > can > > > > > only merge commits one-by-one, which takes some effort. > > > > > > Most likely I will not be able (auto-)merge any of your changes > > > regarding shares into the 2.0 branch. And due to the nature of > > > changes it will be > > > > easier > > > > > to implement the changes directly instead of the trying to merge the > > > 1.x commits. > > > > > > So from my point of view I recommend to keep your changes minimal in > > > able to fix 1835. However your decision will mainly depend on how > > > long you expect to keep developing in Rails 1.x. > > > > > > Unfortunately I am currently not able to give a clear commitment > > > when > > > > Rails > > > > > 2.0 will run without errors. > > > Of the design/refactoring changes for the initial 2.0 I think 90% > > > are in > > > > place, > > > > > however from the testing/bug-hunting I guess only 10% are done, but > > > the latter figure is difficult to predict. > > > > > > I will provide more feedback on your proposal later this weekend. > > > > > > Stefan > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ----- > > --- All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure > > contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, > > security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this > > data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d > > _______________________________________________ > > Rails-devel mailing list > > Rai...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a > definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, > fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT > sense. And common sense. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d > _______________________________________________ > Rails-devel mailing list > Rai...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel |
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X