Hello list, Is anyone working on putting the scaffolding extensions documented at wiki.rubyonrails.com/rails/show/HowToExtendScaffolding into the base Rails? If you haven''t read this site, the extensions cover extending scaffolds to deal with belongs_to and HABTM relationships between tables to make CRUD operations a lot more user-friendly. The changes documented in that page are current, look very generically useful and would save a lot of time in getting a site to the point where it''s usable - you could generate a scaffold, immediately have a runnable Web interface that a user/customer could understand (without any bells and whistles) and from there you could focus largely on usability/security etc. rather than functionality. As far as I can see, putting these extensions into the default scaffold comes with virtually no downside. Just curious - if no-one''s doing this, I might have a go at doing it myself. Regards Dave M.
> Is anyone working on putting the scaffolding extensions documented at > wiki.rubyonrails.com/rails/show/HowToExtendScaffolding into the > base Rails?I''m the author of that page. I wasn''t planning to integrate it into Rails, as using scaffolding for production purposes seems to be frowned upon by the Rails team. However, if the Rails team wants, I can certainly submit a patch. Otherwise, it''s fairly simple to just add the code to environment.rb.> If you haven''t read this site, the extensions cover extending > scaffolds to deal with belongs_to and HABTM relationships between > tables to make CRUD operations a lot more user-friendly. The changes > documented in that page are current, look very generically useful and > would save a lot of time in getting a site to the point where it''s > usable - you could generate a scaffold, immediately have a runnable > Web interface that a user/customer could understand (without any bells > and whistles) and from there you could focus largely on > usability/security etc. rather than functionality. As far as I can > see, putting these extensions into the default scaffold comes with > virtually no downside.I''m glad you found the extensions useful. I''ve found that using the extensions, the automatically generated new and edit scaffolds work great as-is for 80%-90% of the forms on the intranet site on which I''m working. Personally, I feel using scaffolding in production is a good thing, assuming the generated forms meet your needs. Jeremy ***************************************************************** * Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any * * attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) * * and may contain confidential and privileged information, * * including information pertaining to an ongoing audit or * * investigation (see Cal. Gov. C. Secs. 8545, 8545.1 and * * 8547). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or * * distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended * * recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and * * destroy all copies of the original message. * *****************************************************************
Hello,> Is anyone working on putting the scaffolding extensions > documented at > wiki.rubyonrails.com/rails/show/HowToExtendScaffolding > into the base Rails? > > If you haven''t read this site, the extensions cover extending > scaffolds to deal with belongs_to and HABTM relationships > between tables to make CRUD operations a lot more > user-friendly. The changes documented in that page are > current, look very generically useful and would save a lot of > time in getting a site to the point where it''s usable - you > could generate a scaffold, immediately have a runnable Web > interface that a user/customer could understand (without any > bells and whistles) and from there you could focus largely on > usability/security etc. rather than functionality. As far as > I can see, putting these extensions into the default scaffold > comes with virtually no downside. > > Just curious - if no-one''s doing this, I might have a go at > doing it myself.This looks exactly like what I have been looking for!! I assume this can also be extended with autocompletion? Since I''m fairly new with (Ruby and) Rails, I''ll try to see if I can figure this all out, but if this kind of functionality could be available out of the box (in the future) in Rails, it would help very much I think. Best regards, Jeroen Janssen
On 7/13/05, Jeremy Evans <JeremyE-u9dbMM7VY7PtX7QSmKvirg@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > Is anyone working on putting the scaffolding extensions documented at > > wiki.rubyonrails.com/rails/show/HowToExtendScaffolding into the > > base Rails? > > I''m the author of that page. I wasn''t planning to integrate it into Rails, as using scaffolding for production purposes seems to be frowned upon by the Rails team. However, if the Rails team wants, I can certainly submit a patch. Otherwise, it''s fairly simple to just add the code to environment.rb.I can see their thinking, but often I need to put together a quick-and-dirty UI that I can put in front of someone just to confirm that we''re both thinking along the same lines. Your extensions to the scaffolds make this task at least an order of magnitude faster, as far as I can tell - I can literally tweak a database design to e.g. add a new field, reload data (if necessary), regenerate my scaffolds and there''s a bare-bones UI with the new field in place. That''s golden for any agile development task, which seems to be 100% of development tasks at present ;-> For what it''s worth - i.e. just about nothing - I''d support any integration of your scaffold extensions with the base Rails product. Rails is great without it, but an order of magnitude more effective with it. Dave M.