I am quite new to rails and even after reading the docs to routes I still do
not manage to simply duplicate the new route:
<%= link_to ''New Priority'', new_priority_path %> -->
<%= link_to ''Add
Priority'', add_priority_path %>
resources :priorities do
member do
get ''add''
end
rake routes:
add_priority GET /priorities/:id/add(.:format) vs. new_priority GET
/priorities/new(.:format)
Is there any doc how the 7 default routes would be declared, especially new
and create, if I would want to duplicate them (I don''t, I just want to
understand ;) )
--
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
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
Ahmy Yulrizka
2010-Dec-19 14:25 UTC
Re: Routes: How would default routes be defined manually?
I think you forgot end over there ..
resources :priorities do
member do
get ''add''
end
end
also to check your routes, do
rake routes
on your rails root
Ahmy Yulrizka
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 8:15 PM, bourne
<bourne7-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> resources :priorities do
> member do
> get ''add''
> end
>
--
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
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
No, I just failed on copy/paste and lost the end in the original post when
removing the up-route :/
resources :priorities do
member do
get ''up''
get ''add''
end
collection do
end
end
rake routes (complete)
up_priority GET /priorities/:id/up(.:format)
{:controller=>"priorities", :action=>"up"}
add_priority GET /priorities/:id/add(.:format)
{:controller=>"priorities", :action=>"add"}
priorities GET /priorities(.:format)
{:controller=>"priorities", :action=>"index"}
priorities POST /priorities(.:format)
{:controller=>"priorities", :action=>"create"}
new_priority GET /priorities/new(.:format)
{:controller=>"priorities", :action=>"new"}
edit_priority GET /priorities/:id/edit(.:format)
{:controller=>"priorities", :action=>"edit"}
priority GET /priorities/:id(.:format)
{:controller=>"priorities", :action=>"show"}
priority PUT /priorities/:id(.:format)
{:controller=>"priorities", :action=>"update"}
priority DELETE /priorities/:id(.:format)
{:controller=>"priorities", :action=>"destroy"}
root /(.:format)
{:controller=>"priorities", :action=>"index"}
--
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
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
Ahmy Yulrizka
2010-Dec-20 06:04 UTC
Re: Routes: How would default routes be defined manually?
Im trying to figure out what is it that you want. And if im not mistaken,
you want to add priority to behave the same as new_priority.
when you declare resource , rails automaticly assign 7 route respect to REST
the member method inside of the resource would apply to single instance of
the resource
so you get for examlpe
when you define
member do
get ''up''
get ''add''
end
you will get:
/prioriteis/*:id*/add
but when you define
collection do
get ''add''
end
you will get
/priorities/add
also if you dont specify aditional parameter, rails would create a route
name same as the get paramter
get ''add'' would create add_priorities route and map it to
priorites#add
*add* is referring to the get parameter and
*_priorities* referring to the resource
you could also specify a parameter to custom map your route. for example if
you want the add route is handled by *create* action on
*priorities*controller, then you could specify the method like this
get ''add'' => ''priorities#create''
you could also custom the name of the path using :as parameter
get ''add'' => ''priorities#create'', :as
=> my_custom_add
Hope its help
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 9:42 PM, bourne
<bourne7-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> No, I just failed on copy/paste and lost the end in the original post when
> removing the up-route :/
>
>
> resources :priorities do
> member do
> get ''up''
> get ''add''
> end
>
> collection do
>
> end
> end
>
> rake routes (complete)
> up_priority GET /priorities/:id/up(.:format)
> {:controller=>"priorities", :action=>"up"}
> add_priority GET /priorities/:id/add(.:format)
> {:controller=>"priorities", :action=>"add"}
> priorities GET /priorities(.:format)
> {:controller=>"priorities", :action=>"index"}
> priorities POST /priorities(.:format)
> {:controller=>"priorities", :action=>"create"}
> new_priority GET /priorities/new(.:format)
> {:controller=>"priorities", :action=>"new"}
> edit_priority GET /priorities/:id/edit(.:format)
> {:controller=>"priorities", :action=>"edit"}
> priority GET /priorities/:id(.:format)
> {:controller=>"priorities", :action=>"show"}
> priority PUT /priorities/:id(.:format)
> {:controller=>"priorities", :action=>"update"}
> priority DELETE /priorities/:id(.:format)
> {:controller=>"priorities", :action=>"destroy"}
> root /(.:format)
> {:controller=>"priorities", :action=>"index"}
--
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
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
Thank you! Your post is really helpful. As mentioned above, I just want to understand how I would declare the 7 REST routes if they would not have been declared for me, e.g. new1 (add in my example), edit1, ... If I declare add as a collection route, this statement throws an error <%= link_to ''Add Priority'', add_*priority*_path %> (taken from originally created code : <%= link_to ''New Priority'', new_priority_path %>) <%= link_to ''Add Priority'', add_*priorities*_path %> works as expected. My original question was: what is my definition missing compared to the original new? Second, I find this very interesting: get ''add'' => ''priorities#create'', :as => my_custom_add In this form I get an error, the same with :my_custom_add. -- 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 rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
Ahmy Yulrizka
2010-Dec-20 08:37 UTC
Re: Routes: How would default routes be defined manually?
when you specify route inside resource, AFAIK
if you specify the route inside "collection", rails will always append
ies
like priorities
if you specify the route inside "member", rails will always use the
singular
word liake priority
so in that way, one solution (but i dont know if this the best way to do
it). is define custom route outside the resource block. such as.
resources :priorities do
end
get ''/priorities/add'' =>
''priorities#new'', :as => :add_priority
this will give routes
priorities GET /priorities(.:format)
{:action=>"index",
:controller=>"priorities"}
POST /priorities(.:format)
{:action=>"create",
:controller=>"priorities"}
new_priority GET /priorities/new(.:format)
{:action=>"new",
:controller=>"priorities"}
edit_priority GET /priorities/:id/edit(.:format)
{:action=>"edit",
:controller=>"priorities"}
priority GET /priorities/:id(.:format)
{:action=>"show",
:controller=>"priorities"}
PUT /priorities/:id(.:format)
{:action=>"update",
:controller=>"priorities"}
DELETE /priorities/:id(.:format)
{:action=>"destroy",
:controller=>"priorities"}
add_priority GET /priorities/add(.:format)
{:action=>"new",
:controller=>"priorities"}
btw, im using rails 3, i don''t know if there''s different with
the 2.x
version
Ahmy Yulrizka
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 2:50 PM, bourne
<bourne7-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> Thank you! Your post is really helpful.
>
> As mentioned above, I just want to understand how I would declare the 7
> REST routes if they would not have been declared for me, e.g. new1 (add in
> my example), edit1, ...
> If I declare add as a collection route, this statement throws an error
> <%= link_to ''Add Priority'', add_*priority*_path %>
(taken from
> originally created code : <%= link_to ''New Priority'',
new_priority_path %>)
>
> <%= link_to ''Add Priority'', add_*priorities*_path
%> works as expected.
>
> My original question was: what is my definition missing compared to the
> original new?
>
>
> Second, I find this very interesting: get ''add'' =>
''priorities#create'', :as
> => my_custom_add
> In this form I get an error, the same with :my_custom_add.
--
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
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
Mahmoud Said
2010-Dec-20 08:40 UTC
Re: Routes: How would default routes be defined manually?
Bourne, In your example, *add* is like *new. *It should not be a member action, it is a collection one. I think what you are asking for is a bit more elaboration of the default REST routes. When you do: resources :priorities This will generate the 7 default routes. which are two types: 1. Member (you are operating on a specific instance of the priorities). and those are: Show, Edit, Update, Destroy 2. Collection, Where you operate on prorities in general, but not an existing one of them. which is :index, :new, :create for member based actions, the paths generated in a singular form and expects the ID to be passed. so add_priority_path # wrong, you have not provided an id or an instance of Priority add_priority_path(object) # should work, but this is not what u want. new_priority_path is actually a collection. the route will be /priorities/new On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 9:50 AM, bourne <bourne7-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Thank you! Your post is really helpful. > > As mentioned above, I just want to understand how I would declare the 7 > REST routes if they would not have been declared for me, e.g. new1 (add in > my example), edit1, ... > If I declare add as a collection route, this statement throws an error > <%= link_to ''Add Priority'', add_*priority*_path %> (taken from > originally created code : <%= link_to ''New Priority'', new_priority_path %>) > > <%= link_to ''Add Priority'', add_*priorities*_path %> works as expected. > > My original question was: what is my definition missing compared to the > original new? > > > Second, I find this very interesting: get ''add'' => ''priorities#create'', :as > => my_custom_add > In this form I get an error, the same with :my_custom_add. > > -- > 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 rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. >-- Mahmoud Said Software Engineer - eSpace blog.modsaid.com -- 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 rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
Mahmoud Said
2010-Dec-20 08:44 UTC
Re: Routes: How would default routes be defined manually?
Given that you already know what we mentioned. and the correct usage is
resources :priorities do
collection do
get ''add''
end
end
I think what confuses you is: "why is it add_priorities_path and not
add_priority_path like the new_priority_path" (in a singular form)?
is that right ?
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Mahmoud Said
<eng.mahmoud.said-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>wrote:
> Bourne,
>
> In your example, *add* is like *new. *It should not be a member action, it
> is a collection one.
>
> I think what you are asking for is a bit more elaboration of the default
> REST routes.
>
> When you do:
>
> resources :priorities
>
> This will generate the 7 default routes. which are two types:
>
> 1. Member (you are operating on a specific instance of the priorities).
> and those are: Show, Edit, Update, Destroy
> 2. Collection, Where you operate on prorities in general, but not an
> existing one of them. which is :index, :new, :create
>
>
> for member based actions, the paths generated in a singular form and
> expects the ID to be passed. so
>
> add_priority_path # wrong, you have not provided an id or an instance of
> Priority
> add_priority_path(object) # should work, but this is not what u want.
>
> new_priority_path is actually a collection. the route will be
> /priorities/new
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 9:50 AM, bourne
<bourne7-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>> Thank you! Your post is really helpful.
>>
>> As mentioned above, I just want to understand how I would declare the 7
>> REST routes if they would not have been declared for me, e.g. new1 (add
in
>> my example), edit1, ...
>> If I declare add as a collection route, this statement throws an error
>> <%= link_to ''Add Priority'', add_*priority*_path
%> (taken from
>> originally created code : <%= link_to ''New
Priority'', new_priority_path %>)
>>
>> <%= link_to ''Add Priority'', add_*priorities*_path
%> works as expected.
>>
>> My original question was: what is my definition missing compared to the
>> original new?
>>
>>
>> Second, I find this very interesting: get ''add'' =>
''priorities#create'',
>> :as => my_custom_add
>> In this form I get an error, the same with :my_custom_add.
>>
>> --
>> 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
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org>
>> .
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Mahmoud Said
> Software Engineer - eSpace
> blog.modsaid.com
>
>
>
>
--
Mahmoud Said
Software Engineer - eSpace
blog.modsaid.com
--
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
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
On Monday, December 20, 2010 9:44:36 AM UTC+1, modsaid wrote> > I think what confuses you is: "why is it add_priorities_path and not > add_priority_path like the new_priority_path" (in a singular form)? > > is that right ? >Correct :) (I know that this behaviour is fine for collections but I want to understand why new is different and how to declare it to be identical) -- 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 rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
Mahmoud Said
2010-Dec-20 09:35 UTC
Re: Routes: How would default routes be defined manually?
that''s interesting, apparently there is 3rd type other than collection
and
member that is specific to the new.
if u checked at actionpack-3.0.3/lib/action_dispatch/routing/mapper.rb:953
you can how the default routes are added:
collection do
get :index if parent_resource.actions.include?(:index)
post :create if parent_resource.actions.include?(:create)
end
new do
get :new
end if parent_resource.actions.include?(:new)
member do
get :edit if parent_resource.actions.include?(:edit)
get :show if parent_resource.actions.include?(:show)
put :update if parent_resource.actions.include?(:update)
delete :destroy if parent_resource.actions.include?(:destroy)
end
I''m not sure if you can use the "new" on your own. try it and
let me know
how it goes :)
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 11:02 AM, bourne
<bourne7-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Monday, December 20, 2010 9:44:36 AM UTC+1, modsaid wrote
>
>> I think what confuses you is: "why is it add_priorities_path
and not
>> add_priority_path like the new_priority_path" (in a singular
form)?
>>
>> is that right ?
>>
>
> Correct :)
> (I know that this behaviour is fine for collections but I want to
> understand why new is different and how to declare it to be identical)
>
> --
> 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
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org>
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
>
--
Mahmoud Said
Software Engineer - eSpace
blog.modsaid.com
--
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
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
Mahmoud Said
2010-Dec-20 09:44 UTC
Re: Routes: How would default routes be defined manually?
it won''t work, it will be
add_new_priority GET /priorities/new/add(.:format)
{:action=>"add",
:controller=>"priorities"}
however, the collection plural form seems more logical to me, you are
adding a priority to priorities. so you are actually acting on priorities
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Mahmoud Said
<eng.mahmoud.said-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>wrote:
> that''s interesting, apparently there is 3rd type other than
collection and
> member that is specific to the new.
>
>
> if u checked at actionpack-3.0.3/lib/action_dispatch/routing/mapper.rb:953
>
> you can how the default routes are added:
>
> collection do
> get :index if parent_resource.actions.include?(:index)
> post :create if parent_resource.actions.include?(:create)
> end
>
> new do
> get :new
> end if parent_resource.actions.include?(:new)
>
> member do
> get :edit if parent_resource.actions.include?(:edit)
> get :show if parent_resource.actions.include?(:show)
> put :update if parent_resource.actions.include?(:update)
> delete :destroy if parent_resource.actions.include?(:destroy)
> end
>
> I''m not sure if you can use the "new" on your own. try
it and let me know
> how it goes :)
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 11:02 AM, bourne
<bourne7-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Monday, December 20, 2010 9:44:36 AM UTC+1, modsaid wrote
>>
>>> I think what confuses you is: "why is it add_priorities_path
and not
>>> add_priority_path like the new_priority_path" (in a singular
form)?
>>>
>>> is that right ?
>>>
>>
>> Correct :)
>> (I know that this behaviour is fine for collections but I want to
>> understand why new is different and how to declare it to be identical)
>>
>> --
>> 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
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org>
>> .
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Mahmoud Said
> Software Engineer - eSpace
> blog.modsaid.com
>
>
>
>
--
Mahmoud Said
Software Engineer - eSpace
blog.modsaid.com
--
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
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
Ahmy Yulrizka
2010-Dec-20 10:24 UTC
Re: Routes: How would default routes be defined manually?
This is interesting,
it doesn''t work because if you call
member,
the resource mapper call member_scope, which in turn yield
# File ''actionpack/lib/action_dispatch/routing/mapper.rb'',
line 503
def member_scope
"#{path}/:id"end
but the new is very special method, it call new_scope which in turn yield
# File ''actionpack/lib/action_dispatch/routing/mapper.rb'',
line 507
def new_scope(new_path)
"#{path}/#{new_path}"end
http://rubydoc.info/docs/rails/3.0.0/ActionDispatch/Routing/Mapper/Resources#shallow-instance_method
Ahmy Yulrizka
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Mahmoud Said
<eng.mahmoud.said-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>wrote:
> it won''t work, it will be
>
> add_new_priority GET /priorities/new/add(.:format)
{:action=>"add",
> :controller=>"priorities"}
>
>
> however, the collection plural form seems more logical to me, you are
> adding a priority to priorities. so you are actually acting on priorities
>
>
>
--
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
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.