Rails 3.0.6 has been released | Hacker News Reader

Rails 3.0.6 has been released

weblog.rubyonrails.org

37 pointsbradly17 comments

Is a minor upgrade in a web framework considered on-topic for HN?

If you use a framework and want to keep up-to-date with new releases then you can subscribe to that projects mailing list/twitter.

Non-users of the framework aren't likely to care very much about it.

Unless I'm missing something all this post is doing is taking up a front-page slot which could be used by a more worthy story.

By that logic, all HN entries about Firefox, Ubuntu, Python, Node.js etc are "waste of space" because not everyone uses them.

There is an important security fix in this Rails version and for Rails devs, who have a huge presence on HN, it matters just like "the new Ubuntu version boots half a second faster" matters to many.

A story about an interesting use of a technology is interesting to everyone and not just the users of the technology. Plus there's value in the HN discussions.

Minor release announcements of Firefox, Ubuntu, Python, Node.js have no place here.

If you're relying on HN to get updated when software on your production server has security vulnerabilities, then you're doing it wrong. You should be on the security mailing for any public facing software on your server.

The Rails security mailing list for those who aren't on it: http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-security?pli=1

This kind of comment is annoying and useless.

With only 36 points in 13 hours, users have already decided it's not front-page worthy. You didn't need to say anything.

We decide what's on the front page. If enough people vote, the article is worthy.

It was the top story on HN at the time I made the comment, as a result of my comment enough people flagged it to push it down.

As per the quality thread the other day I think there is a view that voting isn't working, and we should figure out how to improve quality. This is my contribution :)

Worth mentioning here that there's a XSS security fix in this release.

I have just recently started using rails for a project and have never had to upgrade before.

I wish they would go over how to upgrade rails in their announcement or link to their own guide. I imagine its just a one-liner. Searching their own site for upgrade doesn't show anything immediate either.

Of course I can look it up very quickly with Google, so its not a problem, but it seems like something they should do.

(I commented there requesting the same)

You just need to change the version of Rails in your Gemfile from 3.0.5 to 3.0.6 and run bundle. Or, if you have

    gem "rails", "~>3.0"

in the Gemfile then I think you just need to run bundle to get it updated.

You usually need to run "bundle update rails" when updating the Rails gem instead of "bundle update", but it will gripe at you and let you know if you try to just run "bundle update".

Even though this is just a bugfix release, Aaron "tenderlove" Patterson's writing style made it seem pretty exciting!

well maybe i don't use my exclamation points as haphazardly as you do.

I don't really care one way or another on how he writes, but I do wonder if it presents a problem when trying to "sell" Rails to certain clients. I have pointed clients to rubyonrails.org in the past just to show how big and mature the community is (these were primary Microsoft shops who doubt all open source projects), but if they saw this for an important security update I'm thinking it might make it a bit harder.

I'm not sure if pointing clients to rubyonrails.org is really the best way to sell the framework, I usually just list off a bunch of Rails sites that I think they've probably heard of. Most of my clients aren't really super duper tech savvy anyway, they just care about the end product.

Yeah, well these clients were all very technical folks... but their blood all ran blue. They wanted to see the MSDN of Rails.

Haha, next time someone wants to see the MSDN of Rails, you should ask them to show you the Github of .NET.

https://github.com/languages/C%23

You mean Codeplex?

It's right here: http://www.codeplex.com/

Reply on news.ycombinator.com