As a test project, I updated linuxsi.com (in Italian) to Rails 3. So far, I am not terribly impressed. It's nice enough, but the upgrade process was quite painful – there's a lot involved in upgrading even such a relatively simple site.
Rails remains the best thing out there, as far as I can tell, in terms of programmer productivity for web projects, but at times it seems like there's a lot of taillight chasing. Upgrade this. Move to this newer, fancier, shinier system. Replace that. Sure, I suppose you can always stick with older versions, but it seems that that is a recipe for simply postponing all of the changes until a later date, when they become even more onerous. And Ruby gems don't really seem to have a mechanism to separate updates with new features from security updates, so for some things staying with older versions might be a security risk. And stuff like plugins mostly just sits there where you dumped it into your project, without any real sense of an upgrade path.
I suppose I'm being a bit of a Grumpy Old Man, but at times the changes feel a bit gratuitous, and with all the breakage that Rails 3 causes, I would caution against upgrading to it for existing projects – use it for new projects to learn it. In some ways it seems to be a Ruby web framework that happens to have some compatibility with Rails. But not 99% – more like 80%, so that you'll spend 80% of your time upgrading that 20%.
As one particular example, if you look at the original rails screencast, he uses <%= form_tag, with the "=". Subsequent versions of Rails dropped that, so you'd do <% form_tag …. do … and now, with Rails 3, we're back to <%= form_tag, with the "=" again. Hrmph!
Hopefully, with a bit of time, I'll see some of the nicer aspects of Rails 3.