I ask of absolutely nothing of John.... i simply stated that i was disappointed by the sparse change log, and that i was holding off on upgrading my important projects until i knew more in depth what to look for.....
and rest assured that i do not sit here and think i know everything about jQuery.... i just do the best i can to help (and learn from) others.... On Jan 14, 12:15 am, "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
