On Jan 15, 2008, at 7:26 AM, Max Ischenko wrote:
My main question is: will Route 2 remain compatible (API) with Routes 1?
Almost completely, yes. It will be generally frowned upon to be using ur_for like, url_for(controller=..., action=...), but that will still work and go to the Route default. In general, a Routes user can migrate by adding named routes, and switching to using url_for with their named routes. That might not be totally insubstantial to a Routes user, but I can't see any way to avoid it, that's why this is Routes 2, not Routes 1.8. People can continue to use Routes 1.x until they're ready to make these changes, or they can use Routes 1.x and add named routes slowly.
We can also put out a Routes 1.8 that throws deprecation warnings whenever you fail to use a named route, to make the migration easier. Ie, if you see no deprecation warnings in 1.8, then 2.0 is a safe move.
Cheers, Ben
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
