Upgrade to Rails 2.3-latest (Feature #196)

Eric, I can't remember if we had talked about this already, but Holger and I think we should upgrade rails to 2.3-latest for 2.0.0. That would correspond with the deprecation of the old i18n syntax, but I suppose someone would have to go through all the views to check for strings that should and shouldn't be h-ed. What do you think?

I was thinking about using 2.3-latest for ChiliProject 2.0 also.

ChiliProject 1.x will need to stay on 2.3.5.

Felix Schäfer wrote:

So what would we need at least to get to 2.3.11? Change the interpolation format in the i18n files, throw out some of the "evil hacksâ„¢" needed for the older stuff to work with the newer gems, what else?

• i18n changes
• hardcoded gem requirements
• standard rails update (e.g. JS files, script/*)

It would also be good to review the commit logs to see the details of the changes. Rails 2.3.5..Rails 2.3.11

Should we create a feature branch for that?

Yes, but it should be off of unstable once we release 1.1.0.

Maybe we could divide it in sub-tasks (when it's time to work on it, not now) so we can share it so you don't get everything on your shoulders ;)

Simon COURTOIS wrote:

Maybe we could divide it in sub-tasks (when it's time to work on it, not now) so we can share it so you don't get everything on your shoulders ;)

Absolutely, though I think we should wait until 1.1.0 is out. After that I'll create the additional branches on github and make new issues.

Sounds good to me :)

As long as you don't create subtasks here. Their implementation isn't complete and have some pretty nasty side effects that are hard to reverse.

What do you mean by "not here" ?

Simon COURTOIS wrote:

What do you mean by "not here" ?

Sorry. "As long as you don't create subtasks on chiliproject.org"

Why ? Migrating to a new version of rails is a multi-step process and dividing it in atomic tasks seams the better way to manage it. Isn't the Issue system made for this kind of situation ? Creating tasks and organizing them with relationships ? Tell me if I'm wrong, I just want to understand your point of view :)

Simon COURTOIS wrote:

Isn't the Issue system made for this kind of situation ?

Yeah, but actual subtasks (the implementation of them on Redmine and thus Chili) are still kinda broken so we shouldn't use them until we fixed that code. You can of course just open new top-level issues for the organizational subtasks and just refer to this one.

Ah ok, that's what I had in mind :)

FYI, redmine trunk is now using Rails 2.3.11 so it should not be too difficult to migrate to it too.

This has been added to unstable in 0e789c5 but I want to do a review of it to make sure everything was upgraded by comparing it to the files in a fresh rails 2.3.11 application.