I am with you on this... On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Tom Locke <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 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... > > Requiring the child relationships be specified in view-hints would solve > this problem too - the primary collection is the first one you list. > > I'm really quite keen to get rid of the special meaning of :dependent => > :destroy before we hit 1.0 > > Tom > > -- > > 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]<hobousers%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/hobousers?hl=en. > > > -- Thanks, Owen Owen Dall Barquin International 410-991-0811 -- 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.
