Where can I find Ruby Version History? I need to check differences
between them.
Regards
···
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
The ChangeLog in the repository:
http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/community/ruby-core/
Or on the web:
http://svn.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/trunk/
···
On Apr 23, 2009, at 09:50, Bruno Sousa wrote:
Where can I find Ruby Version History? I need to check differences
between them.
You can pull a truck and run something like `git svn log` in that dir
that you have pulled. the svn url is a good one.
···
2009/4/23 Bruno Sousa <brgsousa@gmail.com>:
Where can I find Ruby Version History? I need to check differences
between them.Regards
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.
--
John Maclean
07739 171 531
MSc (DIC)
Timezone: GMT
I am for something like main differences/improvements between stable
versions like 0.95, 1.0, 1.8, 1.9 .
john maclean wrote:
···
2009/4/23 Bruno Sousa <brgsousa@gmail.com>:
Where can I find Ruby Version History? I need to check differences
between them.Regards
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.You can pull a truck and run something like `git svn log` in that dir
that you have pulled. the svn url is a good one.
--
John Maclean
07739 171 531
MSc (DIC)Timezone: GMT
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.
I don't believe those are stored anywhere. You'll have to construct them from the tags/ directory of the SVN repo.
···
On Apr 24, 2009, at 06:43, Bruno Sousa wrote:
I am for something like main differences/improvements between stable
versions like 0.95, 1.0, 1.8, 1.9 .
Ruby's source control system leaves much to be desired. If you try to checkout tags you'll get gigabytes of mostly redundant information, which is silly. If you check out trunk you won't get the tags.
The ruby source code isn't that large. The actual code in trunk seems to be only about 15M. The compressed history, including tags and branches, seems to be only about 13M. With a better source control system you should be able to download and manage the entire history without wasting much bandwidth or disk space. That could be very beneficial.
···
On 24 avr. 09, at 14:48, Eric Hodel wrote:
On Apr 24, 2009, at 06:43, Bruno Sousa wrote:
I am for something like main differences/improvements between stable
versions like 0.95, 1.0, 1.8, 1.9 .I don't believe those are stored anywhere. You'll have to construct them from the tags/ directory of the SVN repo.
Reflecting on this it seems surprisingly wasteful given the Ruby community's apparent concern for the environment.
···
On 24 avr. 09, at 16:26, Juan Zanos wrote:
On 24 avr. 09, at 14:48, Eric Hodel wrote:
On Apr 24, 2009, at 06:43, Bruno Sousa wrote:
I am for something like main differences/improvements between stable
versions like 0.95, 1.0, 1.8, 1.9 .I don't believe those are stored anywhere. You'll have to construct them from the tags/ directory of the SVN repo.
Ruby's source control system leaves much to be desired. If you try to checkout tags you'll get gigabytes of mostly redundant information, which is silly. If you check out trunk you won't get the tags.
The ruby source code isn't that large. The actual code in trunk seems to be only about 15M. The compressed history, including tags and branches, seems to be only about 13M. With a better source control system you should be able to download and manage the entire history without wasting much bandwidth or disk space. That could be very beneficial.
I am for something like main differences/improvements between stable
versions like 0.95, 1.0, 1.8, 1.9 .I don't believe those are stored anywhere. You'll have to construct them from the tags/ directory of the SVN repo.
Ruby's source control system leaves much to be desired. If you try to checkout tags you'll get gigabytes of mostly redundant information, which is silly. If you check out trunk you won't get the tags.
The ruby source code isn't that large. The actual code in trunk seems to be only about 15M. The compressed history, including tags and branches, seems to be only about 13M. With a better source control system you should be able to download and manage the entire history without wasting much bandwidth or disk space. That could be very beneficial.
Why bother checking out everything? Know your tools!
$ svn cat http://svn.ruby-lang.org/repos/ruby/tags/v1_8_3/ChangeLog | head
* stable version 1.8.3 released.
* ext/syck/token.c: correctly compute identation of a block
scalar's parent node. [ruby-talk:150620]
svn: Can't write to stream: Broken pipe
$ svn diff http://svn.ruby-lang.org/repos/ruby/tags/v1_8_3/ChangeLog http://svn.ruby-lang.org/repos/ruby/tags/v1_8_4/ChangeLog > head
Index: ChangeLog
···
On Apr 24, 2009, at 13:26, Juan Zanos wrote:
On 24 avr. 09, at 14:48, Eric Hodel wrote:
On Apr 24, 2009, at 06:43, Bruno Sousa wrote:
Wed Sep 21 09:07:55 2005 Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org>
Wed Sep 21 08:52:25 2005 why the lucky stiff <why@ruby-lang.org>
Wed Sep 21 08:20:24 2005 Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@ruby-lang.org>
--- ChangeLog (.../v1_8_3/ChangeLog) (revision 23268)
+++ ChangeLog (.../v1_8_4/ChangeLog) (revision 23268)
@@ -1,3 +1,968 @@
+Sat Dec 24 18:58:14 2005 Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org>
+
+ * stable version 1.8.4 released.
+
+Fri Dec 23 10:30:23 2005 Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org>
diff: standard output: Broken pipe
svn: 'svn_diff_sucks_ass' returned 2
svn: Error reading spooled REPORT request response
I do. That's why I avoid using that tool. Look at your example. How am I supposed to know in advance to look in the directory tags/v1_8_4/ChangeLog unless I get that information from somewhere else? Also, If I need that version I'm going to have to download the whole thing rather than just use a cheap local delta. A better tool would give me all the information I need without external source, without lots of disk space, and without lots of bandwidth.
···
On 24 avr. 09, at 17:45, Eric Hodel wrote:
On Apr 24, 2009, at 13:26, Juan Zanos wrote:
On 24 avr. 09, at 14:48, Eric Hodel wrote:
On Apr 24, 2009, at 06:43, Bruno Sousa wrote:
I am for something like main differences/improvements between stable
versions like 0.95, 1.0, 1.8, 1.9 .I don't believe those are stored anywhere. You'll have to construct them from the tags/ directory of the SVN repo.
Ruby's source control system leaves much to be desired. If you try to checkout tags you'll get gigabytes of mostly redundant information, which is silly. If you check out trunk you won't get the tags.
The ruby source code isn't that large. The actual code in trunk seems to be only about 15M. The compressed history, including tags and branches, seems to be only about 13M. With a better source control system you should be able to download and manage the entire history without wasting much bandwidth or disk space. That could be very beneficial.
Why bother checking out everything? Know your tools!
$ svn cat http://svn.ruby-lang.org/repos/ruby/tags/v1_8_3/ChangeLog > head
Wed Sep 21 09:07:55 2005 Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org>* stable version 1.8.3 released.
Wed Sep 21 08:52:25 2005 why the lucky stiff <why@ruby-lang.org>
* ext/syck/token.c: correctly compute identation of a block
scalar's parent node. [ruby-talk:150620]Wed Sep 21 08:20:24 2005 Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@ruby-lang.org>
svn: Can't write to stream: Broken pipe
$ svn diff http://svn.ruby-lang.org/repos/ruby/tags/v1_8_3/ChangeLog http://svn.ruby-lang.org/repos/ruby/tags/v1_8_4/ChangeLog > head
Index: ChangeLog--- ChangeLog (.../v1_8_3/ChangeLog) (revision 23268)
+++ ChangeLog (.../v1_8_4/ChangeLog) (revision 23268)
@@ -1,3 +1,968 @@
+Sat Dec 24 18:58:14 2005 Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org>
+
+ * stable version 1.8.4 released.
+
+Fri Dec 23 10:30:23 2005 Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org>
diff: standard output: Broken pipe
svn: 'svn_diff_sucks_ass' returned 2
svn: Error reading spooled REPORT request response
I am for something like main differences/improvements between stable
versions like 0.95, 1.0, 1.8, 1.9 .I don't believe those are stored anywhere. You'll have to construct them from the tags/ directory of the SVN repo.
Ruby's source control system leaves much to be desired. If you try to checkout tags you'll get gigabytes of mostly redundant information, which is silly. If you check out trunk you won't get the tags.
The ruby source code isn't that large. The actual code in trunk seems to be only about 15M. The compressed history, including tags and branches, seems to be only about 13M. With a better source control system you should be able to download and manage the entire history without wasting much bandwidth or disk space. That could be very beneficial.
Why bother checking out everything? Know your tools!
$ svn cat http://svn.ruby-lang.org/repos/ruby/tags/v1_8_3/ChangeLog > head
* stable version 1.8.3 released.
* ext/syck/token.c: correctly compute identation of a block
scalar's parent node. [ruby-talk:150620]svn: Can't write to stream: Broken pipe
$ svn diff http://svn.ruby-lang.org/repos/ruby/tags/v1_8_3/ChangeLog http://svn.ruby-lang.org/repos/ruby/tags/v1_8_4/ChangeLog > head
Index: ChangeLog--- ChangeLog (.../v1_8_3/ChangeLog) (revision 23268)
+++ ChangeLog (.../v1_8_4/ChangeLog) (revision 23268)
@@ -1,3 +1,968 @@
+
+ * stable version 1.8.4 released.
+
diff: standard output: Broken pipe
svn: 'svn_diff_sucks_ass' returned 2
svn: Error reading spooled REPORT request response
Eric, your post is hilarious. Check out the second to last line:
svn: 'svn_diff_sucks_ass' returned 2
If somebody converts this repository to something decent I'll be the first to buy them a beer.
···
On 24 avr. 09, at 17:45, Eric Hodel wrote:
On Apr 24, 2009, at 13:26, Juan Zanos wrote:
On 24 avr. 09, at 14:48, Eric Hodel wrote:
On Apr 24, 2009, at 06:43, Bruno Sousa wrote:
Wed Sep 21 09:07:55 2005 Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org>
Wed Sep 21 08:52:25 2005 why the lucky stiff <why@ruby-lang.org>
Wed Sep 21 08:20:24 2005 Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@ruby-lang.org>
+Sat Dec 24 18:58:14 2005 Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org>
+Fri Dec 23 10:30:23 2005 Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org>
unicorns!
···
On Apr 24, 2009, at 14:58 , Juan Zanos wrote:
I do. That's why I avoid using that tool. Look at your example. How am I supposed to know in advance to look in the directory tags/v1_8_4/ChangeLog unless I get that information from somewhere else? Also, If I need that version I'm going to have to download the whole thing rather than just use a cheap local delta. A better tool would give me all the information I need without external source, without lots of disk space, and without lots of bandwidth.
Sadly, my access to unicorns is limited.
···
On 24 avr. 09, at 18:38, Ryan Davis wrote:
On Apr 24, 2009, at 14:58 , Juan Zanos wrote:
I do. That's why I avoid using that tool. Look at your example. How am I supposed to know in advance to look in the directory tags/v1_8_4/ChangeLog unless I get that information from somewhere else? Also, If I need that version I'm going to have to download the whole thing rather than just use a cheap local delta. A better tool would give me all the information I need without external source, without lots of disk space, and without lots of bandwidth.
unicorns!
So I guess your magical tool doesn't exist either.
···
On Apr 24, 2009, at 15:48, Juan Zanos wrote:
On 24 avr. 09, at 18:38, Ryan Davis wrote:
On Apr 24, 2009, at 14:58 , Juan Zanos wrote:
I do. That's why I avoid using that tool. Look at your example. How am I supposed to know in advance to look in the directory tags/v1_8_4/ChangeLog unless I get that information from somewhere else? Also, If I need that version I'm going to have to download the whole thing rather than just use a cheap local delta. A better tool would give me all the information I need without external source, without lots of disk space, and without lots of bandwidth.
unicorns!
Sadly, my access to unicorns is limited.
I could name at least 3 of them.
···
On 24 avr. 09, at 18:55, Eric Hodel wrote:
On Apr 24, 2009, at 15:48, Juan Zanos wrote:
On 24 avr. 09, at 18:38, Ryan Davis wrote:
On Apr 24, 2009, at 14:58 , Juan Zanos wrote:
I do. That's why I avoid using that tool. Look at your example. How am I supposed to know in advance to look in the directory tags/v1_8_4/ChangeLog unless I get that information from somewhere else? Also, If I need that version I'm going to have to download the whole thing rather than just use a cheap local delta. A better tool would give me all the information I need without external source, without lots of disk space, and without lots of bandwidth.
unicorns!
Sadly, my access to unicorns is limited.
So I guess your magical tool doesn't exist either.