Which features from Merb have made it into rails 2.3 ..?

[MyMerb]

Hi,

Just wanted to confirm, which features from Merb have made it into
Rails 2.3 ...

I have read the details from rails 2.3 preview and could not find any
Merb advantages into Rails 2.3 so far...

Was Rails 2.3 an old features planned before Merb Merge...?

Here are some news from... http://ryandaigle.com

" The next scheduled release appears to be the 3.0 release, the merger
of Rails and Merb. The core team has alluded to at least a preview
release to be ready by RailsConf 2009. Seems a bit aggressive for all
the internal tinkering in store, but stay here for for the latest. "

What does this mean... There would be straight Rails 3.0 preview after
this. what about upgrading Merb.. 1.1, 1.2, 1.9 etc...

Can any one focus more on this...?

Thanks

[Justin Smestad]

None of the Merb features are making it into Rails 2.x, everything is slated for Rails 3.x

-- 
Justin Smestad

justin....@gmail.com

[Bill Turner]

At least one thing is included:

In some of the first fruits of the Rails-Merb team merger, Rails 2.3
includes some optimizations for the respond_to method, which is of
course heavily used in many Rails applications to allow your
controller to format results differently based on the MIME type of the
incoming request.

From here: http://guides.rubyonrails.org/2_3_release_notes.html

Bill

On Feb 2, 1:05 pm, Justin Smestad <justin.smes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> None of the Merb features are making it into Rails 2.x, everything is  
> slated for Rails 3.x
> --
> Justin Smestad

> justin.smes...@gmail.com

>
> On Feb 2, 2009, at 5:11 AM, MyMerb wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi,
>
> > Just wanted to confirm, which features from Merb have made it into
> > Rails 2.3 ...
>
> > I have read the details from rails 2.3 preview and could not find any
> > Merb advantages into Rails 2.3 so far...
>
> > Was Rails 2.3 an old features planned before Merb Merge...?
>

> > Here are some news from...http://ryandaigle.com

[Julian Leviston]

An rack integration too

Sent from my iPhone

[Stephen Eley]

On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 10:44 PM, Julian Leviston <jul...@leviston.net> wrote:
>
> An rack integration too

No, that happened before the merge. I remember because the team merge
announcements drowned out the talk about Rails 'metal'.

--
Have Fun,
Steve Eley (sfe...@gmail.com)
ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
http://www.escapepod.org

[Julian Leviston]

Oh I didn't think it was in 2.2

Sent from my iPhone

[Stephen Eley]

On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 11:03 PM, Julian Leviston <jul...@leviston.net> wrote:
>
> Oh I didn't think it was in 2.2

It wasn't. It showed up in Edge Rails before the merge. Which is now
Rails 2.3.

[Julian Leviston]

LOL. Nonetheless it is a merb feature that appeared since 2.2

Blog: http://random8.zenunit.com/
Learn rails: http://sensei.zenunit.com/

[keeran]

I suppose you could consider the move back to Engines as a nod towards
Merb Slices.

Who is leading the Engines side of things? Is there any discussion I
can refer to to work out where I can help?

Kee

[Mirko]

I'm curious about Engines / Slices as well. Is the plan to morph Rails
2.3's Engines into Merb-like Slices in Rails 3.0? If I start using
Engines now, will the migration path to Rails 3.0 Slices be fairly
smooth?

-Mirko

[Yehuda Katz]

Rails 3 will have mountable applications, not engines or slices :)

-- Yehuda

--
Yehuda Katz
Developer | Engine Yard
(ph) 718.877.1325

[Julian Leviston]

That is, seriously, the best news ever.

The ramifications are f***king awesome... coupled with the proper API thing, this means we finally get any level of segmentation and modularity that we desire. I've wanted / needed this for SO long.

I seriously love you :)

Jules

[CRS]

I seriously love you :)

love++

[Joaquin Rivera Padron]

super +1 for mountable apps

2009/2/5 CRS <christ...@gmail.com>

I seriously love you :)

love++

--
www.least-significant-bit.com

[Mirko]

This does sound very promising, although to be honest I'm not sure
what exactly the difference is between mountable apps and slices.
Don't slices already allow you to mount a self-encapsulated sub-
application (consisting of models, views, and controllers) at an
arbitrary path? What do mountable apps add on top of that?

-Mirko

On Feb 5, 1:15 am, Joaquin Rivera Padron <joahk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> super +1 for mountable apps
>

> 2009/2/5 CRS <christocr...@gmail.com>

[Julian Leviston]

I'm assuming/hoping that coupled with ActiveResource and individual
routes (or perhaps something that doesn't exist yet), it will allow
you to define an API for your "sub-app" and therefore encapsulate
it... bringing OOP back into Rails/Merb programming more, and allowing
reuse of components more easily, while still providing optimizations
at at the bare metal layer because the main app and its sub apps are
still really part of the same app.

Julian.

[Stephen Eley]

On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Mirko <mfroe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This does sound very promising, although to be honest I'm not sure
> what exactly the difference is between mountable apps and slices.
> Don't slices already allow you to mount a self-encapsulated sub-
> application (consisting of models, views, and controllers) at an
> arbitrary path? What do mountable apps add on top of that?

I'm hoping the answer is "an end to special cases, like /lib file
stubs and a separate 'slice' executable."

Sure, slices _theoretically_ can run standalone, but they don't really
do it the same way as apps that aren't slices do it. The standalone
part requires hidden magic. And that's annoying as crap when you need
to figure out what initialization magic goes where for running
Cucumber, or configuring a Passenger rackup file, etc.

Ask me how I know this. I eventually gave up and recreated my slice
as a regular app, figuring I'll backport it back into a slice once I
have it better developed. If, by that time, Rails 3 lets me just
plain *run the app* inside another app, I am a happy puppy.