Rails - May 2011 - Rails Routes/Controller/Directory Structure design question

I have a design question where I would appreciate a thoughtful
response.

Let''s say you have a simple application (for example''s sake)
that has
a User, Company and Theme model. A Company `has_one` Theme and
`has_many` Users.

Administrators (a User) can fully manage Companies and Themes - the
whole REST stack, in addition to a few other actions too.
Administrators are expected to do things to Companies and themes that
other user roles cannot do.

We also have a Company role. This role can edit their own Company, as
well as select a Theme from the ones the admin-user added as nice
defaults, or they can just make their own theme.

Now, here we have some non-trivial design choices, and I would like to
know what the best-practice is.

**PART 1**

In Rails, it makes sense to have
`resources :users, :companies, :themes` for the administrators and
probably `resource :company, :theme, :users` for the Company users.

But of course, we run into some naming conflicts here - both singular
and plural - so we might want to try something like
`resource :my_company, :my_theme, :my_users` to separate them? Or is
there a better solution?

Furthermore, a theme is just a component of a company, so maybe we
want to nest them?

    :resource :my_company do
      :resource :theme
      :resources :users
    end

This works okay, but it could be confusing as to which UsersController
we are referring to... no? This is really sticky and I would love to
know how to deal with this. Do you have 1 controller, or 2? What do
you name them?

But then I look at the url, and it''s kind of silly:

    http://myapp.com/my_company/my_theme/edit

I guess it could be worse.

Company users also might want the list of themes via ajax, so is it
correct for them to call:

    http://myapp.com/themes.json

?

Is this how to approach this situation, or is there a better way?

**PART 2**

Also, what should your directory structure look? Should you have
controllers separated by user role?

    /app/controllers/admin/companies_controller.rb
    /app/controllers/admin/themes_controller.rb
    /app/controllers/admin/users_controller.rb
    /app/controllers/company/my_company_controller.rb
    /app/controllers/company/theme_controller.rb
    /app/controllers/company/users_controller.rb

Or is there better ways to handle this?

I would really appreciate a thoughtful response on this. Thanks!

-- 
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.

Oh, I also want to add that Admins will manage Users too, not just
Companies and Themes. So there is a conflict where Companies can
create/edit/delete Users and use/not use the same controller. There is
also potential route conflicts unless you use nested resources.

I also want to add that Admins can do some things to users, but
Company users can do other things. It''s not just a subset - but the
views and actions and forms will be somewhat different.

That is why I am having difficulty figuring out the routes, what the
controllers should be, and what to generalize and what to keep
separate.

-- 
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 Fri, May 27, 2011 at 7:55 PM, egervari
<ken.egervari-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> I have a design question where I would appreciate a thoughtful
> response.
>
> Let''s say you have a simple application (for example''s
sake) that has
> a User, Company and Theme model. A Company `has_one` Theme and
> `has_many` Users.
>
> Administrators (a User) can fully manage Companies and Themes - the
> whole REST stack, in addition to a few other actions too.
> Administrators are expected to do things to Companies and themes that
> other user roles cannot do.
>
> We also have a Company role. This role can edit their own Company, as
> well as select a Theme from the ones the admin-user added as nice
> defaults, or they can just make their own theme.
>
> Now, here we have some non-trivial design choices, and I would like to
> know what the best-practice is.
>
> **PART 1**
>
> In Rails, it makes sense to have
> `resources :users, :companies, :themes` for the administrators and
> probably `resource :company, :theme, :users` for the Company users.
>
> But of course, we run into some naming conflicts here - both singular
> and plural - so we might want to try something like
> `resource :my_company, :my_theme, :my_users` to separate them? Or is
> there a better solution?
>
> Furthermore, a theme is just a component of a company, so maybe we
> want to nest them?
>
>    :resource :my_company do
>      :resource :theme
>      :resources :users
>    end
>
> This works okay, but it could be confusing as to which UsersController
> we are referring to... no? This is really sticky and I would love to
> know how to deal with this. Do you have 1 controller, or 2? What do
> you name them?
>
> But then I look at the url, and it''s kind of silly:
>
>    http://myapp.com/my_company/my_theme/edit
>
> I guess it could be worse.
>
> Company users also might want the list of themes via ajax, so is it
> correct for them to call:
>
>    http://myapp.com/themes.json
>
> ?
>
> Is this how to approach this situation, or is there a better way?
>
> **PART 2**
>
> Also, what should your directory structure look? Should you have
> controllers separated by user role?
>
>    /app/controllers/admin/companies_controller.rb
>    /app/controllers/admin/themes_controller.rb
>    /app/controllers/admin/users_controller.rb
>    /app/controllers/company/my_company_controller.rb
>    /app/controllers/company/theme_controller.rb
>    /app/controllers/company/users_controller.rb
>
> Or is there better ways to handle this?
>
Look into namespacing your routes. So you could end up with the directory
structure above, and have it be clean like:

resources :company
resources :theme
resources :users

namespace :admin
   resources :company
   .....
end


>
> I would really appreciate a thoughtful response on this. Thanks!
>
> --
> 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.
>
>
-- 
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 Fri, May 27, 2011 at 8:00 PM, egervari
<ken.egervari-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> Oh, I also want to add that Admins will manage Users too, not just
> Companies and Themes. So there is a conflict where Companies can
> create/edit/delete Users and use/not use the same controller. There is
> also potential route conflicts unless you use nested resources.
>
> I also want to add that Admins can do some things to users, but
> Company users can do other things. It''s not just a subset - but
the
> views and actions and forms will be somewhat different.
>
> That is why I am having difficulty figuring out the routes, what the
> controllers should be, and what to generalize and what to keep
> separate.
>
That is a challenge and there is no right answer, only what is cleaner. What
is nice about the namespacing way of going is that you have a more clear
delineation as far as rights for the admin. It might mean you dup some code
between the controllers. But that is certainly cleaner than having special
cases in a single controller that sooner or later could become problematic.

>
> --
> 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.
>
>
-- 
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 May 27, 9:02 pm, David Kahn
<d...-rfEMNHKVqOwNic7Bib+Ti1W1rNmOCjRP@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
> On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 7:55 PM, egervari
<ken.egerv...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > I have a design question where I would appreciate a thoughtful
> > response.
>
> > Let''s say you have a simple application (for
example''s sake) that has
> > a User, Company and Theme model. A Company `has_one` Theme and
> > `has_many` Users.
>
> > Administrators (a User) can fully manage Companies and Themes - the
> > whole REST stack, in addition to a few other actions too.
> > Administrators are expected to do things to Companies and themes that
> > other user roles cannot do.
>
> > We also have a Company role. This role can edit their own Company, as
> > well as select a Theme from the ones the admin-user added as nice
> > defaults, or they can just make their own theme.
>
> > Now, here we have some non-trivial design choices, and I would like to
> > know what the best-practice is.
>
> > **PART 1**
>
> > In Rails, it makes sense to have
> > `resources :users, :companies, :themes` for the administrators and
> > probably `resource :company, :theme, :users` for the Company users.
>
> > But of course, we run into some naming conflicts here - both singular
> > and plural - so we might want to try something like
> > `resource :my_company, :my_theme, :my_users` to separate them? Or is
> > there a better solution?
>
> > Furthermore, a theme is just a component of a company, so maybe we
> > want to nest them?
>
> >    :resource :my_company do
> >      :resource :theme
> >      :resources :users
> >    end
>
> > This works okay, but it could be confusing as to which UsersController
> > we are referring to... no? This is really sticky and I would love to
> > know how to deal with this. Do you have 1 controller, or 2? What do
> > you name them?
>
> > But then I look at the url, and it''s kind of silly:
>
> >    http://myapp.com/my_company/my_theme/edit
>
> > I guess it could be worse.
>
> > Company users also might want the list of themes via ajax, so is it
> > correct for them to call:
>
> >    http://myapp.com/themes.json
>
> > ?
>
> > Is this how to approach this situation, or is there a better way?
>
> > **PART 2**
>
> > Also, what should your directory structure look? Should you have
> > controllers separated by user role?
>
> >    /app/controllers/admin/companies_controller.rb
> >    /app/controllers/admin/themes_controller.rb
> >    /app/controllers/admin/users_controller.rb
> >    /app/controllers/company/my_company_controller.rb
> >    /app/controllers/company/theme_controller.rb
> >    /app/controllers/company/users_controller.rb
>
> > Or is there better ways to handle this?
>
> Look into namespacing your routes. So you could end up with the directory
> structure above, and have it be clean like:
>
> resources :company
> resources :theme
> resources :users
>
> namespace :admin
>    resources :company
>    .....
> end
Interesting... I forgot about namespaces. So you suggest namespacing
the admin, but nest "my_company"?

Also, how is my proposed directory structure? Sound good? Is there a
better way?

-- 
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@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.

How do you deal with form_for''s when the routes are nested?

For example, let''s say you have a Admin::CompaniesController in
your :admin namespace. The model is obviously Company. I get an error
for new forms:

    <%= simple_form_for(@company, :url =>
admin_company_path(@company)) do |f| %>

Here''s the error message:

    ActionView::Template::Error: No route matches
{:action=>"show", :controller=>"admin/companies",
:id=>#<Company id:
nil, name: nil, phone_number: nil, address: nil, postal_code: nil,
is_enabled: true, courses_created: 0, province_id: nil, theme_id: nil,
payment_plan_id: nil, created_at: nil, updated_at: nil>}

How can I get rails to play nice? I have no idea why it''s even trying
to use the show action at all...

-- 
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 Fri, May 27, 2011 at 9:11 PM, egervari
<ken.egervari-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> How do you deal with form_for''s when the routes are nested?
>
> For example, let''s say you have a Admin::CompaniesController in
> your :admin namespace. The model is obviously Company. I get an error
> for new forms:
>
>    <%= simple_form_for(@company, :url =>
> admin_company_path(@company)) do |f| %>
>
> Here''s the error message:
>
>    ActionView::Template::Error: No route matches
> {:action=>"show", :controller=>"admin/companies",
:id=>#<Company id:
> nil, name: nil, phone_number: nil, address: nil, postal_code: nil,
> is_enabled: true, courses_created: 0, province_id: nil, theme_id: nil,
> payment_plan_id: nil, created_at: nil, updated_at: nil>}
>
> How can I get rails to play nice? I have no idea why it''s even
trying
> to use the show action at all...
>
Try running rake routes and see what you get.... then either use what you
have available or modify so you have the route you want.

>
> --
> 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.
>
>
-- 
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.

> Try running rake routes and see what you get.... then either use what you
> have available or modify so you have the route you want.
Well, that was the problem - it''s not about the routes being - it was
about rails doing the wrong thing.

The solution was to put:

[:admin, @company]

And then rails would generate the proper :post and :put routes given
this. It tripped me because there''s no way I would have thought of
this...

I mean, to replace a parameter of a model to an array is just strange
for me. It''s elegant, but you have to know this in advance -
it''s
hardly intuitive. Someone would have to tell you or you''d have to look
at the source.

-- 
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.