On Apr 22, 2010, at 4:23 PM, Frederick Cheung wrote:
On Apr 22, 4:04 pm, Rob Biedenharn <[email protected]>
wrote:
However, it is that same experience that has led me to the conclusion
that keeping db/schema.rb in the source repository is wrong. It is
derived data and I would no more put it into the repository than I
would have someone put their object files compiled from C or their
class files compiled from Java in there.
I think there is a difference between an app like mephisto or similar
where many people are going to be deploying instances all over the
place and a private app for which there is only ever going to be one
deploy. With the latter, the database is the definition of the schema
and you don't care about people deploying the app from scratch because
no one will
Fred
"only ever going to be one deploy" ??
When does the app work right the very first time and never has to be
changed?
Your second sentence sounds like you've come around to my point: "the
database is the definition of the schema"
Something goes into the repository in order to track its changes over
time, share it with other developers, and hold the definitive copy to
be deployed. Things that *don't* go into the repository are things
that don't need to be tracked (e.g., log files), aren't or shouldn't
be shared (e.g., passwords and private config like database.yml for
production), or aren't the definitive copy (e.g., like db/schema.rb
unless you're putting it *back* into the repo from the production
environment).
-Rob
Rob Biedenharn http://agileconsultingllc.com
[email protected]
--
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.
