On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 02:41:26PM +1200, Michael Koziarski wrote: > > I added that because so often the answer given by projects to "these bugs > > $are in STABLE" is "upgrade to $BLEEDING_EDGE". > > Yeah, while we have a tradition of running on edge, I'm not going to > suggest that it's a good practise though.
Like a lot of open source, the instability of edge rails is fairly minimal. It's just that you can't *rely* on it to not fall apart on you, especially when there's people using it that don't have the skills to fix it up again... > > Okie. One question I forgot to ask before -- do we go through the +1 > > process/verified process, or do I just set 'verified' immediately to get it > > into the verified report (on the basis that, if the fix went into edge, the > > patch is probably OK)? Should there be (is there) a tag specifically for > > "this needs to be applied to the stable branch"? Nothing jumped out at me > > in http://dev.ror.o/reports. > > Lets just use http://dev.rubyonrails.org/report/19 Tickets get there > by being tagged with 'needs_review'. Sold. I've tagged one patch that I think should go in, and danger has reviewed it too. There's one old patch in that report already that looks a bit fruity (#4492) but I'll leave that for someone else to deal with. Thanks for applying #6353 already, by the way. <grin> - Matt -- I really didn't foresee the Internet. But then, neither did the computer industry. Not that that tells us very much of course -- the computer industry didn't even foresee that the century was going to end. -- Douglas Adams --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" 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/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
