Guys, it's probably a good time for a "time out". This is doing no one any good, least of all those reading the list.
(See my post in the other thread.) Karl Rudd On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Rick Faircloth <r...@whitestonemedia.com> wrote: > > Well, I'm sure John will run all his documentation by you to make > sure it's up to your standards. > > And while I may not be able to offer you any specific knowledge > concerning jQuery, since you obviously know everything and never > have any questions that you can't find answers to, I most certainly > can comment on your approach to understanding new releases. > > You see to have to same lack of commitment to finding information > for yourself that you accuse me of. > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: jquery-en@googlegroups.com [mailto:jquery...@googlegroups.com] On >> Behalf Of MorningZ >> Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 12:10 AM >> To: jQuery (English) >> Subject: [jQuery] Re: @name deprecated? >> >> >> Rick... you are the last person in the world who should give me, or >> anyone else for that matter, ANY jQuery-related advice >> >> And i personally was/am disappointed by the lack of documentation for >> my purposes.... i wasn't saying everyone felt this way, just me.... >> and if that doesn't matter much... oh f__cking well... i'll continue >> using 1.2.6, which i'm perfectly content with >> >> >> On Jan 14, 12:02 am, "Rick Faircloth" <r...@whitestonemedia.com> >> wrote: >> > MorningZ... >> > >> > It would be appreciated if you would bother to read the change logs >> > before asking questions or making any commentary. Obviously, as John >> > suggested, you haven't bothered to read what has been offered, so what >> > you have likely done if a "more comprehensive change log" had been >> > created...you would have had more opportunity to understand the situation >> > that you could ignore. >> > >> > And concerning new releases, it's not John's responsibility to make sure >> > you understand all the code that might be affected. Any professional >> > developer would set up a test bed to run the new releases through and >> > check for problems in advance. >> > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: jquery-en@googlegroups.com [mailto:jquery...@googlegroups.com] On >> > > Behalf Of MorningZ >> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 11:44 PM >> > > To: jQuery (English) >> > > Subject: [jQuery] Re: @name deprecated? >> > >> > > So 5 things changed in this release? >> > >> > > I was hoping for a more comprehensive change log..... i've wanted to >> > > see "sizzle" in action on a very busy site i have jQuery running on, >> > > but the bottom line is i was/still-am scared to death to make the >> > > change from 1.2.6 to 1.3 because i have no idea what has changed to >> > > look out for (for instance, Jorn's validation plugin no longer working >> > > as someone posted)..... >> > >> > > It's all good though, i'm just one person...... if you've got plenty >> > > of feedback from posting about 5 changes, then more power to ya >> > >> > > On Jan 13, 11:34 pm, John Resig <jere...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > > "Why disappointingly?" >> > >> > > > > Because 1.2 to 1.3 is a big major release... and there's a few post >> > > > > to >> > > > > "test test test", but there's no indication of what to test for.. >> > > > > what's changed.... what could break.... >> > >> > > > Huh? Did you miss the beta 1 post where we outlined everything that >> > > > could've >> > > > broken?http://blog.jquery.com/2008/12/22/help-test-jquery-13-beta-1/ >> > >> > > > I think we outlined it there fairly well - and we've gotten some great >> > > > feedback. >> > >> > > > --John > >
