Live data from Hacker News

Rails 3.0: Release candidate

weblog.rubyonrails.org

11–20 of 49 posts

Re: Rails 3.0: Release candidate

#11
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This may be a source of confusion. In most circles, release candidate signifies that this should be the final release, and will only be changed if new bugs emerge.

s/Most/All/. I've never heard of a release candidate meaning anything else, it's something you'll release as-is with a non-rc version unless critical bugs emerge. This is a beta, not a RC.

Think of it as a Rework Candidate then.

Re: Rails 3.0: Release candidate

#12
post #9

For new RoR programmers, is it recommended to just start in with Rails 3, or stick with Rails 2 until Rails 3 "stabilizes"? There are a bunch of Rails 3 books out there; do they generally line up well with this release candidate, or are they full of old information that a new RoR programmer would stumble upon and not understand how to fix? [EDIT] The three books I saw available that specifically mention Rails 3 in th…

I got "rails 3 way" and "agile rails 4.ed". rails3way is pretty much a complete rewrite; its only 266 pages filled so far, but looks good. Agile rails is more finished than rails3way. They are both pretty good books, but if you want more of a "completed" book, agile seems to be the one closer to that. I'm learning RoR from scratch too. The recommended setup is to use ruby 1.9.2. Your first question really depends on what is your intention. If your primary focus is for job hunting, 2 may be the way to go. If you're trying to build something, I don't see much drawbacks (yet) on going to 3.

Re: Rails 3.0: Release candidate

#13
post #9

For new RoR programmers, is it recommended to just start in with Rails 3, or stick with Rails 2 until Rails 3 "stabilizes"? There are a bunch of Rails 3 books out there; do they generally line up well with this release candidate, or are they full of old information that a new RoR programmer would stumble upon and not understand how to fix? [EDIT] The three books I saw available that specifically mention Rails 3 in th…

I would jump right in to Rails 3. It's pretty great right now, and it's only going to get better.

Re: Rails 3.0: Release candidate

#14
post #9

For new RoR programmers, is it recommended to just start in with Rails 3, or stick with Rails 2 until Rails 3 "stabilizes"? There are a bunch of Rails 3 books out there; do they generally line up well with this release candidate, or are they full of old information that a new RoR programmer would stumble upon and not understand how to fix? [EDIT] The three books I saw available that specifically mention Rails 3 in th…

The most up-to-date book is the free Rails Tutorial http://railstutorial.org, which will be updated to Rails 3 soon after it's final is released.

If you have an older book using an older version of rails, DON'T use Rails 3, use the version used in your book (DHH mentioned this on an episode of coderpath http://coderpath.com/posts/1)

Re: Rails 3.0: Release candidate

#15
post #9

For new RoR programmers, is it recommended to just start in with Rails 3, or stick with Rails 2 until Rails 3 "stabilizes"? There are a bunch of Rails 3 books out there; do they generally line up well with this release candidate, or are they full of old information that a new RoR programmer would stumble upon and not understand how to fix? [EDIT] The three books I saw available that specifically mention Rails 3 in th…

I got "rails 3 way" and "agile rails 4.ed". rails3way is pretty much a complete rewrite; its only 266 pages filled so far, but looks good. Agile rails is more finished than rails3way. They are both pretty good books, but if you want more of a "completed" book, agile seems to be the one closer to that. I'm learning RoR from scratch too. The recommended setup is to use ruby 1.9.2. Your first question really depends on…

Go to Rails 3, a lot of the ways of doing things in 2.X will be deprecated in 3.1 and removed in 3.2, so just save yourself the hassle. Rails 3 also cleans up a tremendous amount of code and removes a lot of the 'obtrusive' Javascript from your views.

As far as 1.9.2, if you plan to do deployment (Even for testing) any time soon on Heroku (the coolest, if not the best hosting solution for Rails) then you may want to kick back to 1.8.7, because Heroku won't support 1.9.2 until a final is released.

Re: Rails 3.0: Release candidate

#16
post #9

For new RoR programmers, is it recommended to just start in with Rails 3, or stick with Rails 2 until Rails 3 "stabilizes"? There are a bunch of Rails 3 books out there; do they generally line up well with this release candidate, or are they full of old information that a new RoR programmer would stumble upon and not understand how to fix? [EDIT] The three books I saw available that specifically mention Rails 3 in th…

The list of changes in Rails 3.0 is fairly approachable if you understand the basics of Rails. I'd recommend taking a look for yourself - http://guides.rails.info/3_0_release_notes.html

As far as whether 2.3 or 3.0 makes the most sense at this point, it depends. Personally, I have been working on a brand new project that I started with 3.0 beta 1 and haven't ran into any major headaches. That said, since you're new there is a lot more information out there regarding 2.3 (be careful, some is much older).

To give you some better advice, why are you getting into Rails? Are you trying to get a project started/out the door/etc, or simply looking to learn it because it looks interesting/fun?

Re: Rails 3.0: Release candidate

#17
post #9

For new RoR programmers, is it recommended to just start in with Rails 3, or stick with Rails 2 until Rails 3 "stabilizes"? There are a bunch of Rails 3 books out there; do they generally line up well with this release candidate, or are they full of old information that a new RoR programmer would stumble upon and not understand how to fix? [EDIT] The three books I saw available that specifically mention Rails 3 in th…

I think now would be an excellent time to jump into 3.0. So much has changed since 2.x, practically every Rails developer, new and old, will be blogging, tweeting, debugging and asking and answering questions on StackOverflow about Rails 3, you'd be daft to lag behind and miss the opportunity.

Re: Rails 3.0: Release candidate

#18
post #3

"We’ll be making sure we get performance of Active Record back to at least 2.3 levels before release." Why call it a Release Candidate if you still plan on tweak more stuff?

I don't think you are supposed to question DHH or what his name is.

Wow, ok. It was an attempt at humor. So now my question is is HN not the place for that? Or do HN folks generally get behind RoR? Or...do I just need to be more thoughtful and not thoughtless in my postings?

Help me be a better HN commentator, please.

Re: Rails 3.0: Release candidate

#19
post #18
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you are supposed to question DHH or what his name is.

Wow, ok. It was an attempt at humor. So now my question is is HN not the place for that? Or do HN folks generally get behind RoR? Or...do I just need to be more thoughtful and not thoughtless in my postings? Help me be a better HN commentator, please.

[deleted]

Re: Rails 3.0: Release candidate

#20
post #18
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you are supposed to question DHH or what his name is.

Wow, ok. It was an attempt at humor. So now my question is is HN not the place for that? Or do HN folks generally get behind RoR? Or...do I just need to be more thoughtful and not thoughtless in my postings? Help me be a better HN commentator, please.

If you get down-modded to 0, then you know you did something wrong. Humor is typically hit or miss, sometimes it kills, sometimes it doesn't. That being said, it is an online community and standard mob-rule still applies. I wouldn't dwell on a -4 too much (especially if no one will even comment to tell you why they down-modded). It happens, and no you're not a bad person ;-)
Post reply on HN