[Rails-core] Re: timestamped migrations

The fact that there are two caveats to the theoretical approach are probably a testament as to how useful it will actually be. I think the UTC timestamps are great. Someone earlier said this should be solved by communication, but then people are now saying that it's a problem that people have to

[Rails-core] Re: timestamped migrations

Is there a way to address some of the less-than-perfect aesthetics of the UTC migrations without losing any of their (very useful) functionality? Along the lines of what Jordi was saying, or perhaps setting the UTC stamp inside the migration itself rather than as part of the filename (I haven't l

[Rails-core] Re: require 'application' loads it twice

On Jul 11, 2008, at 4:50 PM, Michael Koziarski wrote: On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 10:48 PM, randy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yes, the same line does appear in rspec-rails/lib/spec/rails.rb And when I make Koz's fix, it does fix it for "rake spec" awesome. Remember to submit it upstream :) ht

[Rails-core] Re: ActionController for Resources

Yes, we did. You might also say that I badgered you about Full-circle REST... On Jul 10, 8:02 am, "Michael Koziarski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... > > "Full Circle REST" is where it's at. > > Definitely, and I think we've discussed this previously on #rails-contrib? > ... --~--~-~--~--

[Rails-core] Re: require 'application' loads it twice

On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 10:48 PM, randy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yes, the same line does appear in rspec-rails/lib/spec/rails.rb > And when I make Koz's fix, it does fix it for "rake spec" awesome. Remember to submit it upstream :) -- Cheers Koz --~--~-~--~~~--

[Rails-core] Re: require 'application' loads it twice

Yes, the same line does appear in rspec-rails/lib/spec/rails.rb And when I make Koz's fix, it does fix it for "rake spec" Thanks!! --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post

[Rails-core] Re: require 'application' loads it twice

That sounds like an rspec problem. Is there a require 'application' somewhere in their source? On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 10:36 PM, randy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It fixes it in script/console but not when I run rake spec. > > > -- Cheers Koz --~--~-~--~~~

[Rails-core] Re: require 'application' loads it twice

It fixes it in script/console but not when I run rake spec. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsub

[Rails-core] Re: require 'application' loads it twice

> I'm experiencing the same exact problem (application.rb is loaded > twice when using script/console and running rspec). Using the latest > stable Rails (2.1.0) and RSpec (1.1.4). I'm looking into it but have > nothing helpful to contribute at the moment. This is on a project that > we're bringin

[Rails-core] Re: Implicit routing to nested collections

Hi Kevin, Glad you like it! > elaborate on how to use :default to merge resources into the same namespace? map.namespace :merged do |merged| merged.root :controller => "merged", :action => "index" merged.resources :zipcodes, :default => true, :requirements => {:id => /\d{5}/} merg

[Rails-core] Re: require 'application' loads it twice

I also have been puzzled by this. It can be reproduced in one minute: Create a fresh rails app named 'fred': rails fred Edit apps/controller/application.rb and insert a constant: X = 2 Type: script/console --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because yo

[Rails-core] Re: Implicit routing to nested collections

Great plugin! I plan on using this and I am hoping you could elaborate on how to use :default to merge resources into the same namespace? > You can also use :default to merge several resources into the same > namespace and use routing requirements to distinguish the correct > controller based on

[Rails-core] Re: require 'application' loads it twice

I'm experiencing the same exact problem (application.rb is loaded twice when using script/console and running rspec). Using the latest stable Rails (2.1.0) and RSpec (1.1.4). I'm looking into it but have nothing helpful to contribute at the moment. This is on a project that we're bringing up to sp

[Rails-core] Re: timestamped migrations

> (Josh Susser, I copied you because this could be a good opportunity to slip > migration concordance logic into core. I'd be glad to help.) > > The funny thing about all of this, is that UTC migrations were introduced > as a quick way to fix the problem of migration number clashes. It was easier >

[Rails-core] Re: timestamped migrations

On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 11:29 AM, Murray Steele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2008/7/11 Michael Koziarski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> >> Beyond the ugly file names are there any downsides which I'm missing? > > > My understanding is that the problem that timestamped migrations is the > solution to is

[Rails-core] Re: timestamped migrations

On Jul 11, 2008, at 9:24 AM, Andrew Stone wrote: So, here's my take: From a single developer/small team perspective timestamped migrations were unnecessarily added as the standard format. The problem addressed by introducing timestamped migrations is a communication issue that doesn't

[Rails-core] Re: timestamped migrations

2008/7/11 Michael Koziarski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Beyond the ugly file names are there any downsides which I'm missing? My understanding is that the problem that timestamped migrations is the solution to is that of multiple developers committing the same numbered migration file. This, as far

[Rails-core] Re: timestamped migrations

> I still haven't gotten a good reason to make it mandatory other than the > "working in a team environment benefit" and the sense it's a "because we > said so" attitude. With your patch it won't be mandatory any more, which is the best of both worlds > To me, this is similar to the semicolon in

[Rails-core] Re: timestamped migrations

> The timestamped migrations are fully backwards compatible with the > integer based ones, there are no practical downsides to switching to > it beyond the Timestamp collision that you've mentioned. There are > however some aesthetic considerations which I think would be nice to > handle with an o

[Rails-core] Re: timestamped migrations

> I'm not familiar with what the "etc" represents and find it funny you > mention "Those who want to switch to integers again can do so easily > enough". When those who wanted timestamps could have done it easily enough > without it being forced upon those who don't. The timestamped migrations a

[Rails-core] Re: timestamped migrations

Whether you're on git, svn, cvs, copying files to one-another, numeric migrations are a show-stopper. To revert the question, why do you want numeric migrations that bad? On 11 Jul 2008, at 16:29, Andrew Stone wrote: > > Every application that gets coded by more then one person has benefit >

[Rails-core] Re: timestamped migrations

> Every application that gets coded by more then one person has benefit > with timestamped migrations. I think most Rails applications get > developed by > 1 person, so timestamped migrations are the logical > choice imo. > > Thanks for the input Jan. I'm not saying timestamps don't have benefits,

[Rails-core] Re: timestamped migrations

Every application that gets coded by more then one person has benefit with timestamped migrations. I think most Rails applications get developed by > 1 person, so timestamped migrations are the logical choice imo. regards, Jan De Poorter http://workswithruby.com On 11 Jul 2008, at 16:11, A

[Rails-core] Re: timestamped migrations

On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 9:54 AM, Michael Koziarski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > If you don't mind, could you explain why the should be the default? Or > is > > this explanation already out there on a blog or something, I'm obviously > > missing something because I don't get that reasoning. >

[Rails-core] Re: require 'application' loads it twice

> I don't think it's expected behavior that requiring 'application' loads it a > second time. No, double requiring isn't expected. > Looking at the code, it appears that #require_dependency (which calls > #require_or_load) has two different mechanisms: :load or :require. I'm > curious if anyone

[Rails-core] Re: timestamped migrations

> If you don't mind, could you explain why the should be the default? Or is > this explanation already out there on a blog or something, I'm obviously > missing something because I don't get that reasoning. For all the reasons it was included in the first place, fewer conflicts on branches, etc.

[Rails-core] Re: timestamped migrations

> > It's marked incomplete because you've got the defaults backwards. UTC > migrations should be the default: > > > +# Specify whether or not to use timestamps for migration numbers > +cattr_accessor :timestamped_migrations , :instance_writer => false > +@@timestamped_migrations = fals

[Rails-core] Re: timestamped migrations

> Pratik suggested I send an email to this list to discuss making timestamped > migrations optional. I have submitted a ticket which includes a patch. I > am a bit confused why the ticket was marked as incomplete as the solution > seems rather simple. IMHO, making this optional would have saved

[Rails-core] timestamped migrations

Hello all, Pratik suggested I send an email to this list to discuss making timestamped migrations optional. I have submitted a ticketwhich includes a patch. I am a bit confus

[Rails-core] require 'application' loads it twice

I've discovered that application.rb is being loaded twice in a couple situations. It is not when simply running script/server, but it is when running script/console and specs with rspec. The first place it is always loaded is in the #to_prepare callback in dispatcher.rb, using #require_dep

[Rails-core] manga

manga manga books, Bleach 329, One Piece 507, Naruto 408, Hot manga, Download The hottest mangas and the latest chapters Manga news, Most popular mangas, Latest mangas, Latest chapters http://english1.isoshu.com http://emanga1.isoshu.com --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~

[Rails-core] GemPlugins and classic plugins consistency

Hello, http://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994/tickets/515-make-plugin-generator-create-rails-init-rb This patch is another step in the effort of having single code-base for GemPlugins and classic plugins. This will ease migration from plugins to GemPlugins. There are also few tickets rega

[Rails-core] Re: ActiveModel::Validatable(Total Rewrite, Totally Awesome) - Request for comment on work in progress (NOW WITH TL;DR)

> It's mostly a philosophical thing: if it looks like an array it should > really act like an array as much as possible. Least surprise and all > that. Having symbol indexes strongly suggests a Hash-like rather then > an Array-like which I'm trying to move away from. > > I'm 100% for keeping error

[Rails-core] Re: ActionController for Resources

> What I do like about hamptons proposal is that he's indicating he wants > the most basic resource facilities. Definitely, I think it's a great idea to come up with a nice evolutionary enhancement to the resources code, along with some added metadata for reflecting on what's going on. > However

[Rails-core] Vampire Knight 42

Vampire Knight 42 Vampire Knight 42, Bleach 329, One Piece 507, Naruto 408, Hot manga, Download The hottest mangas and the latest chapters Manga news, Most popular mangas, Latest mangas, Latest chapters http://english1.isoshu.com http://emanga1.isoshu.com --~--~-~--~~