Have you written about how to do this using RVM with Ruby 1.9?

I’m having problems with making DH Passenger use ruby 1.9.

thanks

scott weitzman

Don’t worry about the “old code” part, though. I had to update a lot of the code I “researched” for my deploy. And I’ve changed it myself since I wrote this post. I’ll probably return to this topic after 3.0 ships with some updates.

For example, I’ve since added “staging” as an environment for cap to use, which changes servers, so “cap staging deploy” goes to a different server than “cap production deploy” goes to.

That’s the fun of Rails: things are constantly changing — so much so that sometimes even by the time they’re on the web they’re obsolete!

This is the github repo of the radiant recipes: github.com/intinig/radiant-recipes

Pay attention though, because that’s old code (very)

It would have been helpful had the leadership team discussion focused on a review of the process by which community members are assigned positions within the Joomla! project. That was the crux of the problem and reviewing and adjusting that process would have been a helpful response.

Unfortunately, the conversation did not go that way. Instead, the mistakes of the individual who was banned a year earlier were put on display and the conversation shifted to the integrity of those who would involve him.

As is often the case, there was a single voice in the discussion dealing with the real issues. That voice was not heard.

At this point, I think it would be best to remove the display of the wrong doing since it had no bearing on the problem. And then, go back and focus on the process issue that created the problem to begin with.

It can be very tricky business to deal with problems of this nature. It’s never to late to make things right and it’s important to give people another chance.

Not here in the US. In fact, you can go to a web site and see a list of former sex offenders (who have already served their full prison sentence) who live in your neighborhood, complete with their names and current addresses.

I can see reasons both for and against such a practice, so let’s not open that sort of a debate, OK? I just bring it up to show that’s far from a universal practice.

But in the specific case of the person in question, I have mixed feelings about the situation you describe. While I agree it was ugly to see the spectacle he made of himself rehashed, and quite possibly made him squirm to have it waved in his face again, it also may have the salutary effect of reminding us all that our actions have consequences, and that what we say and do out here on the web can stick with us for a long time. It’s a reminder that we all need to control ourselves out here.

“As it was, so shall it ever be” is a sad mantra. It denies life, for the essence of life is growth and change. It’s the trap of the Devil, which to this day continues to snare otherwise intelligent and good people.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemies.’ But I say to you, love your enemies. Pray for those who hurt you. If you do this, you will be true children of your Father in heaven. He causes the sun to rise on good people and on evil people, and he sends rain to those who do right and to those who do wrong. If you love only the people who love you, you will get no reward. Even the tax collectors do that. And if you are nice only to your friends, you are no better than other people. Even those who don’t know God are nice to their friends.

Matthew 5:43-47

If you don’t take this as a professional view, personally I think banning someone who has done nothing wrong might well have had legal implications, at least in theory.

It is a sad thought that a quiet ATAAW ban might have been less harmful than his name being pulled through the mud in the leadership discussion that followed Rob’s correct decision not to give in to undue pressure. Even heavy criminals see their names omitted in news reports.