[#10193] String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...>

Hi,

41 messages 2007/02/05
[#10197] Re: String.ord — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/02/06

Hi,

[#10198] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/06

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#10199] Re: String.ord — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...> 2007/02/06

David Flanagan wrote:

[#10200] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/06

Daniel Berger wrote:

[#10208] Re: String.ord — "Nikolai Weibull" <now@...> 2007/02/06

On 2/6/07, David Flanagan <david@davidflanagan.com> wrote:

[#10213] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/06

Nikolai Weibull wrote:

[#10215] Re: String.ord — "Nikolai Weibull" <now@...> 2007/02/06

On 2/6/07, David Flanagan <david@davidflanagan.com> wrote:

[#10216] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/07

Nikolai Weibull wrote:

[#10288] Socket library should support abstract unix sockets — <noreply@...>

Bugs item #8597, was opened at 2007-02-13 16:10

12 messages 2007/02/13

[#10321] File.basename fails on Windows root paths — <noreply@...>

Bugs item #8676, was opened at 2007-02-15 10:09

11 messages 2007/02/15

[#10323] Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...>

Some of the Ruby code used by TextMate makes use of xmlrpc/

31 messages 2007/02/15
[#10324] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...> 2007/02/15

> -----Original Message-----

[#10326] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...> 2007/02/15

On Feb 15, 2007, at 1:29 PM, Berger, Daniel wrote:

[#10342] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...> 2007/02/16

While I am complaining about xmlrpc, we have another issue. It's

[#10343] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — Alex Young <alex@...> 2007/02/16

James Edward Gray II wrote:

[#10344] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...> 2007/02/16

On Feb 16, 2007, at 12:08 PM, Alex Young wrote:

Re: SVN revision corresponding to 1.8.5_p12?

From: Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...>
Date: 2007-02-02 08:00:33 UTC
List: ruby-core #10171
Vincent Isambart wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>> > Simple question: what SVN revision corresponds to the 1.8.5_p12 
>> release?
>> > I'm updating JRuby's copy of the stdlib to 1.8.5, and I need to know
>> > which revision to pull/diff/merge.
>>
>> Are you sure it's in SVN? If I remember well the 1.8 branch was still
>> using CVS (even if I've read that it will probably be managed soon
>> using SVN because of problems with the CVS server). As the SVN
>> repository was created before the release of 1.8.5_p12, I wonder if
>> anyone did put it on SVN. At least there are no 1.8.5_12 tags on the
>> SVN repository...
> 
> However the version designated with the tag v1_8_5_11 does not seem to
> have much difference with the 1.8.5_p12 version. The only difference
> written in the ChangeLog is "stable version 1.8.5-p12 released" so
> except for the version number I think there shouldn't be any
> difference.
> 

I ended up just going with the most current code on the ruby_1_8_5 
branch, and things seem to be working well. Thanks!

- Charlie

In This Thread

Prev Next