Good comments, Matt.  What would you suggest the default show-page
tags look like?

-Owen

On Nov 27, 2:51 pm, Matt Jones <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Nov 27, 2009, at 12:06 PM, Owen wrote:
>
> > Question from Tom:
>
> > "As you know Hobo takes a guess at what the parent/child relationships
> > in the UI should be, based on the presence of :dependent => :destroy
>
> > One of the most common criticisms of Hobo is that it is too magic. I
> > think this particular trick is probably the worst offence. I've been
> > thinking for a while we should get rid of it. i.e. there are no  
> > parent/
> > child relationships in the UI until you declare them with viewhints.
>
> > Obviously this is kind of a big breaking change, but maybe it's one we
> > should get in before 1.0. What do you think?"
>
> The :dependent => :destroy declaration seems like a pretty obvious way  
> to say "these objects are children of the object declaring has_many".  
> If I had to pick a feature for "excessive magic", it's the  
> primary_collection stuff in the default show pages. Without view  
> hints, the choice is (AFAIK) based on source order. Not exactly  
> intuitive...
>
> On that same line, one thing I've ended up doing in a number of apps  
> is making *all* the dependent collections behave like the primary  
> collection. Right now, that requires some DRYML fiddling. The fact  
> that the default show-page tags now hook into the content param rather  
> than relying on the page having more specific bits (content-header,  
> content-body, aside) means that it's impossible to globally change the  
> structure of default pages short of essentially rewriting them.
>
> --Matt Jones

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hobo 
Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/hobousers?hl=en.


Reply via email to