No, it's 1.3... though I've thought about moving it forward to 1.4 before we start getting a bunch of users.
The better solution is probably the refactor to use url_for as then you get a single point to make changes that works for both vanilla rails links and hobo links. Also, since url_for changes to handle subdomains are already documented, it's less documentation to create/maintain. Either way though, probably need to have the ability to pass host, domain, sub, port etc. options to object_url, even if it just passes it along the chain to url_for. Another subdomain bug: the url_for_page_path used in table-plus header breaks badly with a subdomain specific route. I'm routing /:id to a particular controller/method for a particular subdomain and if I leave the table-plus in place, it gives a no route found error (which confused the shit out of me because I thought it was the route that wasn't working for the longest time). On Friday, August 10, 2012 10:12:23 AM UTC-6, Bryan Larsen wrote: > > That's very strange. I just assumed that we were using the Rails > routing system to build our paths. In many places we are, but the > <a> tag and its helpers build them up as strings, and of course they > don't support the host or protocol options. I'm really surprised > that nobody has complained about that before. > > Now I just have to decide whether to refactor object_url to base it on > url_for or whether I should just take the easy route and add host & > protocol options. > > Opinions? > > Is the app you're working on using 1.4? Whatever I do should > backport fairly easily, but... > > Bryan > > On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 8:15 PM, kevinpfromnm > <[email protected]<javascript:>> > wrote: > > Trying a subdomain enabled site but because most (all?) of the links > aren't > > using url_for, the standard rails way of changing how the subdomain is > used > > no longer works. Really have a simple case where I want urls to > redirect > > back to the main url when viewing a page through the subdomain, but > either > > I'm too tired to be doing this or it's obfuscated in the source. Either > > way, was hoping there'd be a simple one place handles all change to be > made. > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups > > "Hobo Users" group. > > To view this discussion on the web visit > > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/hobousers/-/RH1hpKLC-SwJ. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]<javascript:>. > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected] <javascript:>. > > For more options, visit this group at > > http://groups.google.com/group/hobousers?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hobo Users" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/hobousers/-/VlwpP0zxb6IJ. 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.
