On Feb 11, 11:23 pm, casual <kab...@gmail.com> wrote: > I doubt that you could backport 10.2 changes since it was a pretty major.
casual is right. If someone wants to take on backporting fixes to 0.9.11, I'll certainly support it, but I don't think I'll have the time to support both 0.9 and 0.10 simultaneously. As it is though, there are more than 200 bug fixes between 0.9 and 0.10.2, so I doubt they could be backported without essentially duplicating 0.10.2. > Maybe you can outline the problems you are having upgrading to > 10.2 and people here can help out? (there shouldn't be anything to > rewrite in your migrations for example) I would love to hear what some of the problems are. I can't say I'll have time to deal with them all myself, but letting the community know what they are might spur someone to take on fixing them. I'm actually in the middle of converting a fairly large app over to 0.10.2 from 0.9. Most of the problems I've encountered are with Query::Path usage generating invalid INNER JOIN syntax, before/after filters that are acting wonky (this is a known bug), the change of belongs_to to be :required => true by default, and the stricter (working) behavior of dm-constraints. I'll probably be addressing the first two shortly, while the third will probably be staying, and the fourth issue corrects the buggy behaviour of dm-constraints. (and in this case actually revealed some logic errors in the app) -- Dan -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DataMapper" group. To post to this group, send email to datamap...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to datamapper+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/datamapper?hl=en.
