What kind of other changes have you needed? What features would you like an API to provide?
On Friday, October 11, 2019 at 5:33:00 AM UTC-7, ed wrote: > > I’d rather see a public API that we could hook into safely. While the > sorting sounds helpful, I’ve needed other behavior changes in the ruby > schema dumper too. > > On Thursday, October 10, 2019 at 5:04:59 PM UTC-7, Jake Moffatt wrote: > > For context: I am the original author of the > fix-db-schema-conflicts gem. > > > > It prevents the kind of annoying churn described in this earlier thread: > > > > > > > https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!searchin/rubyonrails-core/sort$20columns$20schema|sort:date/rubyonrails-core/h6q8nGFzGKs/pztvg5sJrbgJ > > > > > > > > > Namely, when two people make changes to the same Rails codebase it can > create a situation where they are forever locked into a contest of > flip-flopping the order of columns/foreign-keys, etc in the `db/schema.rb` > file each time they make changes. > > > > > > The fix-db-schema-conflicts gem "fixes" this by prepending some code to > the Rails schema generation that sorts everything before spitting it out to > schema.rb. > > > > > > Additionally it uses Rubocop to autoformat the generated file to use > uniform spacing and column alignment. > > > > Over the years I've maintained this gem the vast majority of issues > surrounding it have come from Rubocop compatibility with Rails. The Rubocop > autocorrect is really something that could be applied separately by any > team and was only added to my gem as a convenience, which has turned into a > huge mess in terms of gem maintenance. The real value of my gem comes from > the ordering of the database schema. > > > > > > I propose making a small change to Rails that integrates my gem's schema > sorting logic into Rails by default, with a configuration option to > preserve the ordering if a specific application relies on column sort order > for some reason. > > > > This change would not affect structure.sql in any way. > > > > In my mind this is a common source of frustration for every single Rails > project that has more than contributor, and it is a simple, low-risk change > (can be reverted with a configuration). > > > > I would be very glad to do the work if it was desired. > > > > > > What does the community think, before I spend time on a PR for this? > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rubyonrails-core/e8012102-955f-47e8-b8a4-35841022eadc%40googlegroups.com.
