On 12 Mar 2009, at 17:01, Chad Woolley wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 9:10 AM, Tekin Suleyman <[email protected]> > wrote: >> This looks good to me, much neater than having separate tables or >> extra >> columns to maintain migrations from plugins.I think it's perfectly >> reasonable to expect a user of a plugin to copy the migrations that >> creates >> the models to their db/migrations directory. > > Unnecessarily copying a file from a plugin seems wrong. Referencing > plugin migrations from your app (as Desert does) seems right. > > -- Chad
One of the reasons I prefer the copy method is that it's much easier to examine and manage the migration history of an app if they're all in one place. The current engines plugin behaviour is pretty much the same as desert as far as I can see and I find the indirection of having a migration reference another migration a bit of a pain. Also, the fact that the schema_migrations table remains untouched this way is a big plus. Tekin --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" 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/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
