Rails - May 2006 - Tables names with model classes in seperate modules

I have a module that deals with content pages and categories in my 
application so create following tables:

content_pages
content_categories

Obviously I need a Page and Category module to map to these tables, but 
in order to avoid conflicts with other Category classes, i declare my 
model classes like this:

Content::Page
Content::Category

Now, that''s all fine - except that my models are still looking for the 
tables based on the class name - i.e. pages or categories.  The easy fix 
is to just use set_table_name in the models, but i wondered if there was 
some way that Rails can pick tables like this for example:

{module}_{class}

Cheers!

Steve

On May 8, 2006, at 10:10 AM, Stephen Bartholomew wrote:
> I have a module that deals with content pages and categories in my  
> application so create following tables:
>
> content_pages
> content_categories
>
> Obviously I need a Page and Category module to map to these tables,  
> but in order to avoid conflicts with other Category classes, i  
> declare my model classes like this:
>
> Content::Page
> Content::Category
>
> Now, that''s all fine - except that my models are still looking for
> the tables based on the class name - i.e. pages or categories.  The  
> easy fix is to just use set_table_name in the models, but i  
> wondered if there was some way that Rails can pick tables like this  
> for example:
>
> {module}_{class}

How about

   module Content
     class Base < ActiveRecord::Base
       self.abstract_class = true
       self.table_name_prefix = ''content_''
     end

     # table_name = ''content_pages''
     class Page < Base
     end
   end

Best,
jeremy

Hmm.. the only problem with that is that Rails still looks for the model 
in models/content/page.rb rather than models/content.rb. I''m guessing i
could override that but this whole approach is ringing alarm bells..

The other problem i have is with choosing a controller layout.  I could 
  do it like this:

controllers/admin/content/page_controller.rb
controllers/admin/content/category_controller.rb
- which causes problems with link_to and gets pretty messy.

I could just make one content_controller and have methods like new_page, 
new_category etc - but that also seems pretty messy.

This all makes me think that I might be approaching this in the wrong 
way.  Ideally i''d like to just write a module and be able to plug it in
to any application, and not have anything conflict with existing 
tables/classes.

Would i need to look into Rails engines to achieve this? Obviously i''m 
not looking for a detailed breakdown of how to do that but a point in 
the right direction would be great :0)

Cheers,

Steve


Jeremy Kemper wrote:
> On May 8, 2006, at 10:10 AM, Stephen Bartholomew wrote:
> 
>> I have a module that deals with content pages and categories in my  
>> application so create following tables:
>>
>> content_pages
>> content_categories
>>
>> Obviously I need a Page and Category module to map to these tables,  
>> but in order to avoid conflicts with other Category classes, i  
>> declare my model classes like this:
>>
>> Content::Page
>> Content::Category
>>
>> Now, that''s all fine - except that my models are still looking
for
>> the tables based on the class name - i.e. pages or categories.  The  
>> easy fix is to just use set_table_name in the models, but i  wondered 
>> if there was some way that Rails can pick tables like this  for
example:
>>
>> {module}_{class}
> 
> 
> 
> How about
> 
>   module Content
>     class Base < ActiveRecord::Base
>       self.abstract_class = true
>       self.table_name_prefix = ''content_''
>     end
> 
>     # table_name = ''content_pages''
>     class Page < Base
>     end
>   end
> 
> Best,
> jeremy
> _______________________________________________
> Rails mailing list
> Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
> 
> 
>

On May 8, 2006, at 11:41 AM, Stephen Bartholomew wrote:
> Hmm.. the only problem with that is that Rails still looks for the  
> model in models/content/page.rb rather than models/content.rb. I''m
> guessing i could override that but this whole approach is ringing  
> alarm bells..
I''m not sure what you''re trying to achieve.

If you want to plug in "Content" to any app but aren''t sure
of what
you want out of it or what it entails, look into Rails Engines.

If you want to neatly namespace and DRY your content classes, put  
them in a common module and inherit/mixin common behavior.  Exploit  
the Rails dir/module nesting conventions as much as possible (look  
for Foo::Bar in foo/bar, requiring foo.rb if present.)

Best,
jeremy

Sorry, i was thinking out aloud with that one - might have seemed a bit 
mixed up :0)

I guess i''m just trying to make sure that doing things the right way in
terms of using the Rails conventions as much as possible.

Thanks for your advice,

Steve

Jeremy Kemper wrote:
> On May 8, 2006, at 11:41 AM, Stephen Bartholomew wrote:
> 
>> Hmm.. the only problem with that is that Rails still looks for the  
>> model in models/content/page.rb rather than models/content.rb.
I''m
>> guessing i could override that but this whole approach is ringing  
>> alarm bells..
> 
> 
> I''m not sure what you''re trying to achieve.
> 
> If you want to plug in "Content" to any app but aren''t
sure of what  you
> want out of it or what it entails, look into Rails Engines.
> 
> If you want to neatly namespace and DRY your content classes, put  them 
> in a common module and inherit/mixin common behavior.  Exploit  the 
> Rails dir/module nesting conventions as much as possible (look  for 
> Foo::Bar in foo/bar, requiring foo.rb if present.)
> 
> Best,
> jeremy
> _______________________________________________
> Rails mailing list
> Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
> 
> 
>