On Sun, 2010-03-07 at 04:57 +0100, Phillip Koebbe wrote: > I have a utility controller that has an action in it. Before I changed > to namespaced controllers, I could access the action with: > > /utility/my_action > > There are no resources associated with the controller, so I'm assuming > the stock route > > map.connect ':controller/:action/:id' > > picked it up. However, for reasons I don't want to go into detail about, > I moved the utility controller into a namespace (Web), and the route > started failing. Ultimately, I added > > map.connect 'web/utility/:action', :controller => 'web/utility' > > to routes.rb and it started working again. I do not understand why I had > to specify 'web/utility' in the map.connect statement. Why didn't the > stock map.connect pick it up? And why wouldn't > > map.connect 'web/:controller/:action' > > work? ---- assuming that the first line of app/controllers/web/utility_controller.rb looks like
class Web::UtilityController < ApplicationController I don't think you really need to do a whole lot with routes.rb at all (the views would necessarily have to follow a similar pathing in app/views/web/utility) but I also wonder whether you are using the plural utilities instead of the singular utility, etc. Craig -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" 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-talk?hl=en.
