I thank that because this bug has been around since 3.0.2 version:
https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994/tickets/6034-human_attribute_name-scopes-translations-differently-for-nested-classes-since-rails-302
lot of people assumed that using '.' instead of '/' is the new way of
doing things in
I meant
class Articles
module Articles
class Articles::Category
--
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 unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyon
This issue started here:
https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994/tickets/3768-patch-add-full_message-option-to-validations#ticket-3768-69
Then José Valim thought it was a bug and asked me to create another issue:
https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994/tickets/5572
Then, this issu
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
> This issue started here:
>
>
> https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994/tickets/3768-patch-add-full_message-option-to-validations#ticket-3768-69
>
> Then José Valim thought it was a bug and asked me to create another issue:
>
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 08:18:45AM -0700, John Firebaugh wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas > wrote:
>
> > This issue started here:
> >
> >
> > https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994/tickets/3768-patch-add-full_message-option-to-validations#ticket-3768-69
>
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 01:23:55AM +0200, Robert Pankowecki wrote:
> I also found a bug that occurs on 3.0.5
>
> ruby-1.9.2-p136 :004 > Time.now
> => 2011-03-30 01:15:20 +0200
> ruby-1.9.2-p136 :005 > Date.today
> => Wed, 30 Mar 2011
> ruby-1.9.2-p136 :006 > Date.yesterday
> => Mon, 28 Mar 2011
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Aaron Patterson
wrote:
> I agree we should support both for now, and deprecate one. I'll come
> up with a test and fix, and we'll release a new RC.
Or we could add a setting which version you prefer.
> Thanks for reporting this!
Thanks for RC release and the a
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 5:55 PM, Aaron Patterson
wrote:
>> As you can see the simple expectation that yesterday = today -1 and
>> tomorrow = today + 1 is apparently not true in some cases. This
>> problem probably happens around midnight in some zones...
>>
>> Do you want me to create tickets for
First, if my understanding of what is happening is in error then
please forgive me.
I am given to understand that when a new AR model object is
initialized then AR obtains from the database, and I suppose caches
for further use, those columns that have defaults assigned and the
default value for e
On 30 March 2011 19:45, byrnejb wrote:
> First, if my understanding of what is happening is in error then
> please forgive me.
>
> I am given to understand that when a new AR model object is
> initialized then AR obtains from the database, and I suppose caches
> for further use, those columns that
On Wed, March 30, 2011 15:25, Colin Law wrote:
>
> Why do you need infinity as the default value? Why not make it zero
> for example, or even better use null to indicate no date, which
> would be more conventional.
>
> Colin
That is quite beside the point. The issue I raise is whether the
fram
On 30 March 2011 20:46, James B. Byrne wrote:
>
> On Wed, March 30, 2011 15:25, Colin Law wrote:
>
>>
>> Why do you need infinity as the default value? Why not make it zero
>> for example, or even better use null to indicate no date, which
>> would be more conventional.
>>
>> Colin
>
> That is qu
I'm interested in the answer to Byrne's original question, but I think
another solution here is to use '-12-31' as the infinite date.
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Colin Law wrote:
> On 30 March 2011 19:45, byrnejb wrote:
> > First, if my understanding of what is happening is in error t
On Wed, March 30, 2011 15:30, Geoff Harcourt wrote:
> I'm interested in the answer to Byrne's original question, but I
> think another solution here is to use '-12-31' as the infinite
> date.
I had considered that, or at least something similar, but had
received advice on the PG mailing list
On Wed, March 30, 2011 16:02, Colin Law wrote:
> On 30 March 2011 20:46, James B. Byrne
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, March 30, 2011 15:25, Colin Law wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Why do you need infinity as the default value? Why not make it
>>> zero for example, or even better use null to indicate no date,
>>> w
On Mar 30, 9:50 pm, "James B. Byrne" wrote:
> On Wed, March 30, 2011 15:30, Geoff Harcourt wrote:
> > I'm interested in the answer to Byrne's original question, but I
> > think another solution here is to use '-12-31' as the infinite
> > date.
>
> I had considered that, or at least something s
As Fred mentions later in the thread your issue here is twofold. One
is that Rails isn't correctly understanding 'infinity', that's
obviously postgresql specific and has no parallel in ruby itself (as
you said). That'll never be fixed.
The next issue you have is that rails is always providing val
On Wed, March 30, 2011 17:06, Frederick Cheung wrote:
>
> Well I certainly consider it desirable to read the defaults from the
> database. I'd consider it extremely unintuitive if a validation
> failed because some column was not set even though the default
> value for the column would have made
On Wed, March 30, 2011 17:23, Michael Koziarski wrote:
>
>
> The next issue you have is that rails is always providing values for
> every column when it does an insert, irrespective of whether you've
> actually changed those columns. We already support writing only
> changed values during update,
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 08:33:28PM +0200, Robert Pankowecki wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 5:55 PM, Aaron Patterson
> wrote:
> >> As you can see the simple expectation that yesterday = today -1 and
> >> tomorrow = today + 1 is apparently not true in some cases. This
> >> problem probably happens
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 08:18:45AM -0700, John Firebaugh wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas > wrote:
>
> > This issue started here:
> >
> >
> > https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994/tickets/3768-patch-add-full_message-option-to-validations#ticket-3768-69
>
On Mar 30, 2011, at 7:18 PM, Aaron Patterson wrote:
> I'll be on vacation. :-D
Fixed that for you. :)
--
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 unsubscribe
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 08:18:45AM -0700, John Firebaugh wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas > wrote:
>
> > This issue started here:
> >
> >
> > https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994/tickets/3768-patch-add-full_message-option-to-validations#ticket-3768-69
>
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Aaron Patterson wrote:
> + def
> test_translated_model_attributes_with_attribute_matching_namespaced_model_name_and_dot
> +assert_deprecated do
> + I18n.backend.store_translations 'en', :activemodel => {:attributes
> => {:person => {:gender => 'person g
Attached is my proposed patch for the translation issue. I think we should
support both conventions and deprecate neither. The newer convention is
cleaner when you nest multiple models within one namespace:
en:
activemodel:
models:
namespace:
model_one:
one: Model One
other: Model Ones
mod
OH EM GEE!!!
I've pushed the 3.0.6.rc2 gem to rubygems.org! Please try it out!
I will keep this announcement short and sweet.
Please read the announcement for 3.0.6.rc1:
http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/380568
If it seems too "3.0.6.rc1 centric", then try this:
26 matches
Mail list logo
