Following AA's DSL, you could have something like this for allowing everything:
allowed_params do |params|
  params.permit(User.column_names.map(&:to_sym)
end

If a allowed_params call is not defined in AA's controller, assume
everything is allowed or nothing is allowed, up to what's best for
everyone.

I'm afraid we're way off-topic right now, though. :)

On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Gary Weaver <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sorry that was a little unclear- by that "perform CRUD UI" part, I was
> trying to say that AA can automatically provide a CRUD UI for models without
> having to define permitted attributes- well, not taking into account mass
> assignment security in Rails 3, that is. I'm actually not sure whether it
> looks at protected attributes or not. I assume all that would have to change
> in a Rails 4 version of AA, but right now we just want to make it work with
> Rails 3 and SP, so whatever gets us there is a hopefully secure and DRY
> fashion is what we are looking for (or at least it is what at least a
> handful of us would like to see that are using SP with Rails 3.2.x).
>
>
> On Thursday, October 25, 2012 3:17:06 PM UTC-4, Gary Weaver wrote:
>>
>> As per convention, SP's definition of what is allowed in a controller is a
>> hash, which doesn't really fit into the AA definition of a controller from
>> what I see, but I could be wrong.
>>
>> And AA's definition of a controller is done via a DSL for a controller,
>> not an actual controller.
>>
>> Hooking into what columns are editable in AA I *think* is going to take
>> some work to work with SP, per cursory review of their code. I could be
>> wrong.
>>
>> In ActiveAdmin, you can just generate a controller, make changes to the
>> model via migrations, etc. and you still have the ability to perform CRUD UI
>> on the model without having to permit new parameters (fields/attributes) in
>> the controller. So, to have AA perform as it did before, the default would
>> need to be something similar to permit_all_parameters and although we could
>> just make this assumption and say all AA controllers should permit all, we
>> decided to make it a method that said you were permitting all so you could
>> see that in your AA controller definition.
>>
>> I'm probably misunderstanding though so feel free to point out specifics
>> as to what it could be doing.
>>
>> Thanks for the feedback!
>>
>> On Thursday, October 25, 2012 2:47:31 PM UTC-4, Pedro Nascimento wrote:
>>>
>>> Just a tip: I think CoC would help you here. Why not look for a
>>> specific method defining what parameters are allowed and if there is
>>> one, use it? You would be able to get rid of the
>>> permit_all_parameters.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Gary Weaver <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > Thanks! Currently we were adding SP support in the patch by letting the
>>> > developer explictly perform a permit_all_parameters in the ActiveAdmin
>>> > controller definition. That is not the way we'd like to do it but a
>>> > more
>>> > integrated and robust approach should involve more involved changes to
>>> > AA,
>>> > and since the developer has to explicitly define that all parameters
>>> > are
>>> > being permitted, that works for now even though it is up for debate
>>> > whether
>>> > that should be integrated as an option.
>>> >
>>> > So for the appraisal gem- I would set up an appraisal for with SP and
>>> > without SP and I could just check to see whether StrongParameters
>>> > constant
>>> > has been defined or not wherever controllers are defined in the AA
>>> > tests to
>>> > know whether to call permit_all_parameters. Sounds like a plan.
>>> >
>>> > Even if SP won't have a kill switch (which I agree there are arguments
>>> > against), it is requiring temporary workarounds that effectively
>>> > disable it
>>> > so that people can use their existing code.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Thursday, October 25, 2012 1:22:30 PM UTC-4, Allen Madsen wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Check out https://github.com/thoughtbot/appraisal
>>> >>
>>> >> Allen Madsen
>>> >> http://www.allenmadsen.com
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Gary Weaver <[email protected]>
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Request denied by dhh. See pull request for reasons. Sounds like
>>> >>> strong_parameters is living up to its name. It won't be taken down by
>>> >>> a
>>> >>> measly on/off switch. :p
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Thursday, October 25, 2012 11:25:19 AM UTC-4, Gary Weaver wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Added ability to disable and reenable strong_parameters:
>>> >>>> https://github.com/rails/strong_parameters/pull/55
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Goal is to allow more hassle-free inclusion of strong_parameters for
>>> >>>> testing with and without strong_parameters, because I wanted to have
>>> >>>> that
>>> >>>> before adding tests for this strong_parameters patch for
>>> >>>> activeadmin:
>>> >>>> https://github.com/gregbell/active_admin/issues/1731
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Know this looks suboptimal as it still behaves differently when SP
>>> >>>> is
>>> >>>> disabled, but I thought this might better allow disabling without
>>> >>>> providing
>>> >>>> broken behavior when reenabled. It may need more tests to flesh out
>>> >>>> any
>>> >>>> issues, but this is a first attempt and it has a test to disable and
>>> >>>> re-enable that appears to work.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Thanks for any feedback.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> --
>>> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> >>> Groups
>>> >>> "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
>>> >>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>> >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rubyonrails-core/-/4_vA4-Su-mkJ.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> 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.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> > --
>>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> > Groups
>>> > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
>>> > To view this discussion on the web visit
>>> > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rubyonrails-core/-/xNoVq3MrtlQJ.
>>> >
>>> > 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.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rubyonrails-core/-/YwQvUJphTesJ.
>
> 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.

-- 
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.

Reply via email to