I don't think he is making a subjective comparison there. Most people using merb are coming from a rails background, so I think it is fair to inform them of release practices that they may not be expecting.
On Nov 25, 10:06 pm, Max <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nice work on run_later in models thing. That hadn't occurred to me > that that would be nice, but...it is! > > Also, is it really necessary to compare to Rails? > > On Nov 25, 10:25 am, "Yehuda Katz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hey guys! > > I'm releasing 1.0.3, a quick update from last night's 1.0.2, which addresses > > the following issues: > > > - override!, which was introduced in 1.0.2, was broken. It is now working > > - run_later is now available via Merb.run_later, for use in models > > - the template not found error was missing a space. It now reads > > correctly > > - the generated code and comments for error_messages_for was misleading. > > It now correctly reflects the fact that you should pass an object to > > error_messages_for > > > We plan to release point-releases to 1.0 as fixes become available, so there > > may be more such releases than in Rails. The goal is to release often enough > > to keep the list of changes in each release relatively small and > > understandable, and you can feel free to upgrade to the latest point release > > every 2 weeks if you don't want to go through the upgrade process every week > > (or more frequently). Keep an eye out for point releases that reflect > > security fixes, because those upgrades should be considered mandatory. > > > -- > > Yehuda Katz > > Developer | Engine Yard > > (ph) 718.877.1325 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "merb" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/merb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
