Rails 2.3.8 (was: Re: ruby 1.8.7p299 is now rawhide build tree)

[Mamoru Tasaka]

Hello:

Mohammed Morsi wrote, at 08/13/2010 03:45 AM +9:00:
> On 08/10/2010 02:30 PM, Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
>> Mohammed Morsi wrote, at 08/11/2010 01:49 AM +9:00:
>>> On 08/01/2010 02:52 PM, Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
>>>> <snip>
>>>>> ===
>>>>> BTW I tested this latest RPM in a VM and am happy to say via some light surface testing:
>>>>> rake, rack, rails, rspec, and gem work out of the box, and the puppet, rails, and deltacloud
>>>>> test/spec suites work in the same manner as they do against 1.8.6.
>>>> Thank you for testing. By the way, if rails 2.3.8 is ready, would you upgrade Fedora's rails
>>>> related packages to 2.3.8 for rawhide/F-14 for now?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I just went through and cleaned up and updated the Rails 2.3.8 rpms.
>>>
>>> I uploaded the new srpms to my blog here http://mo.morsi.org/blog/node/325
>>> All the issues that I could find are now taken care of, and the rpms
>>> work fine against Ruby 1.8.7 being shipped w/ F14.
>>>
>>> I tested rails as far as creating a new project, generating a new controller
>>> with a 'hello world' action / view, interfacing with the sqlite3-ruby gem,
>>> and running ./script/server and verifying the results. Everything worked as
>>> it should without errors.
>>>
>>> If anything looks off, shout out, else it would be good to start pushing
>>> for these to be updated in Fedora.
>>>
>>> -Mo
>>>
>> First of all, I appreciate your contribution to rails 2.3.8 srpms.
>>
>>
>> Well, I am not familiar with rails so I cannot do "detailed" test for new gem
>> related srpms. So for now I just took diffs of the spec files between on current
>> Fedora SCM and in your srpms. Then some notes:
>>
>> - Would you check (and update) the dependency for each binary rpm?
>> At least it seems
>> - -actionpack rpm now should have R: rubygem(rack)>= 1.1.0.
>> By the way current latest rack version is 1.2.1, however can actionpack (2.3.8)
>> work with rack 1.2.x? actionpack 2.3.8 metadata seems to have "~> 1.1.0" dependency
>> for rack, so rack 1.2.x and actionpack 2.3.8 seems incompatible "as it is".
>>
>
> Done, updated actionpack rpm here:
>
> http://mo.morsi.org/files/rpms/rubygem-actionpack-2.3.8-2.fc13.src.rpm
>
> I believe actionpack should work with rack 1.2.x as indicated by this upstream commit
>
> http://github.com/rails/rails/commit/f3bb185b03e746b52a4035a6df002597d8552e74
>
> Should there be some issues when we update rack, most likely they will just entail finding the upstream commits which fix those and apply them to the rpm (if not just rebasing the rpm itself to a more updated actionpack version with the fixes included).
>
>
>> - About activerecord-2.3.8-sqlite3-compat.patch in -activerecord srpm:
>> - Does this patch work after sqlite3-ruby is updated to the latest?
>> (i.e. is SQLite3::Version::STRING defined in sqlite3-ruby 1.3.1?)
>> If not, I think the applied patch should be revised so that patches activerecord
>> 2.3.8 works with both sqlite3-ruby 1.2.4 (current Fedora) and 1.3.1 (latest).
>>
>> Something like below?
>> if current_adapter?(:SQLite3Adapter)&& defined?(SQLite3::Version::VERSION)&& SQLite3::Version::VERSION> '1.2.5'
>
> The way I did it should work against both 1.2.4 and 1.3.1 since both define Version::STRING, where as only version 1.3.1 defines Version::VERSION.
>
> Regardless, your way also works, and with the goal of getting these updates into Fedora asap, I updated the SRPM which can be found here:
>
> http://mo.morsi.org/files/rpms/rubygem-activerecord-2.3.8-2.fc13.src.rpm
>
> -Mo
>

Again I just checked spec files (and patches) only (because I don't
know about rails well), however on my eyes  now
your srpms are good. Now I think these srpms should be imported into
F15 / F14 (at least F14-testing) tree ASAP so that people can test them.

Opinions welcome.

Regards,
Mamoru