Ruby on Rails: Core Google Group

Re: [Rails-core] ActionMailer with Mail gem - It is here

2009-11-24T16:00:06Z

Now how about JRuby? ;)

in_place_edit_for API page

2009-11-24T04:12:22Z

Today I googled to see where in_place_edit_for wandered off to and I saw
that the first result was this page:
[link]

Since this doesn't exist in Rails anymore, can we get it removed from the
site? Otherwise, people may continue to think that this is still in Rails.

Re: [Rails-core] ActionMailer with Mail gem - It is here

2009-11-23T23:29:51Z

Heh, thanks.

So I just updated the mail gem to 1.3.0 and against my fork of actionmailer
at github/mikel/rails, ActionMailer now passes all tests in MRI 1.8.6, 1.8.7
and 1.9.1

Mikel

--
[link]
Rails, RSpec and Life blog....

Re: [Rails-core] Re: Queue Abstraction Layer

2009-11-23T15:57:06Z

Seems to me it's analogous to caching from a service-oriented architecture
pov - ActiveSupport::Queue like ActiveSupport::Cache ? Interface/implements
approach? AMPQ-compliant interface? Starling? Also suggest that there may
be different levels of the interface, starting with very simple transient

Re: [Rails-core] Re: Queue Abstraction Layer

2009-11-23T15:40:27Z

Queues != Model. Josh, you are right indeed. +1 from me for AW & AQ :-)

Cheers,

Amol

Re: [Rails-core] Re: Queue Abstraction Layer

2009-11-23T15:17:22Z

Interesting ideas.

I think it be "ActionQueue" since its not a model layer (not sure).

Maybe both belong in the same "pack" similar to ActionPack.

So we have some root package called "ActionBackgroundShit" and it
contains AW and AQ.

actionbackgroundshit/lib/actio n_worker/*
actionbackgroundshit/lib/actio n_queue/*

Re: [Rails-core] ActionMailer with Mail gem - It is here

2009-11-23T14:15:49Z

KUDOS! Hell yes!

- Ken

Re: Queue Abstraction Layer

2009-11-23T11:50:31Z

I would love to see the related scheduled job be part of this as well
since some processes can only have a single instance running at a
time.

Re: [Rails-core] Queue Abstraction Layer

2009-11-23T07:17:37Z

+1 on the concept ... I feel that Rails has been without this for a
while. With the recent surge of activity on queue services, I think
this is an awesome suggestion ... it would be great to have a standard
Rails-ish way of setting up multiple work queues.

I think that a good starting point for where to look for inspiration

Re: [Rails-core] ActionMailer with Mail gem - It is here

2009-11-23T05:11:50Z

Mail will run on Ruby 1.8.6, 1.8.7 and 1.9.1 with no spec failures

My ActionMailer fork with Mail runs without error on 1.8.7.

Currently we have a few failures for ActionMailer + Mail on 1.9.1, but they
will be fixed soon, no big deal.

Mikel

Queue Abstraction Layer

2009-11-23T00:57:17Z

I want to take a moment to talk about the notion of a queue
abstraction layer in Rails and put a stake in the ground with my
opinions on the topic while at the same time getting some feedback.

My understanding is this: at the moment ActiveWorker (which can be
seen in this repo: [link] ) is the current

Re: [Rails-core] ActionMailer with Mail gem - It is here

2009-11-22T23:17:37Z

Which interpreters?

-- Chad

ActionMailer with Mail gem - It is here

2009-11-22T12:48:32Z

So, I have integrated edge ActionMailer with the Mail gem, removing TMail in
the process.

Currently, ActionMailer is running with 131 tests, 309 assertions, 0
failures, 0 errors

This is using ActionMailer from [link] as well as the
Mail gem version 1.2.8

But mail is throwing a few warnings in the process and I would love more

Re: [Rails-core] Dirty Associations

2009-11-19T04:30:31Z

Poking around a little, it's completely an implementation side-effect,
and only appears in the exact case you've described. For instance,
assigning to a has_many doesn't show up in .changes either:

def test_changed_includes_new_reco rd_assignments
album = Album.create! :title => "Give Up the Ghost"

Re: [Rails-core] Dirty Associations

2009-11-19T03:25:53Z

Nope, looks like a side-effect of the implementation to me.

--
Cheers

Koz