similar to: Re-tasking destroy contoller action...is this bad practice?

Hey all, i''m rather new to rails and was curious if ActiveRecord implemented anything like is_active where the delete functions would just mark records as inactive, vs deleting rows. (similar to created_at, etc). I need a history of transactions, and this is how I would code in other languages. Any advice? Is there are smarter way to implement this? Thanks in advance! -- Posted via

I recently upgraded to Rails 3, and this error has come up ubiquitously: DEPRECATION WARNING: Base.named_scope has been deprecated, please use Base.scope instead. Any ideas on how to get rid of it? Or should I just wait for something? There''s actually no place in my application where the code "Base.named_scope" exists, so I assume the problem is inherent in gems that

Hello all, I am wondering how people here are handling soft deletes in Rails. I''ve need a couple of gems/plugins that seem to handle this but from what I gather development has stopped on them. All I need to do right now is mark something as deleted in the DB...nothing fancy. I''m thinking that the simple addition of a deleted_at column, some named scopes (maybe even a default

Hi, I was wondering if there is a way to skip the application of a named_scope to calls made in legacy migrations. I am working with some old migrations that include some data manipulation tasks, and my default scope is preventing those migrations from running. I''m trying to avoid editing those migration files with with_exclusive_scope. Thanks, -G -- Posted via

I''m looking for a way to subclass active record (I''ll refer to the subclass I want to create as NewActiveRecord) so that I can call different methods on a save or destroy action on all models which sub class NewActiveRecord I dont want to use before_save or any of the other regular call back methods as I want to be able to use these call backs in the models which subclass

Hi All, So I thought I had this acts_as_paranoid problem previously and fixed by going to rails 0.14.2, although I''m not 100% it was the same thing. I''m now on rails 0.14.3 and I''m getting: undefined method `constrain'' for class `Class'' for any model that includes acts_as_paranoid. My application trace is below. Has anyone else got this and know a

I''m running 0.14.2 and am a little confused as to the best way to install mix-ins. I''m specifically using "acts_as_paranoid" as an example (as it is one of the simpler implementations). It is a gem and can be "installed" as a gem, but then what''s the best way to integrate it into my app (require_gem?). I''ve seen recommendations to require it

In my controller...this code works def list2 first_name = params[:client][:first_name] @myclients = Client.find(:all, :conditions => ["first_name = :first_name", {:first_name => first_name}]) end this code doesn''t... def list2 first_name = params[:client][:first_name] if first_name searchstring = ''["first_name =

Hi, We are using samba version 3.0.28 on Sun solaris 5.10 integrated with Windows 2003 Domain Controller. It has been running for couple of years without any issues. Recently the 2003 domain controllers are upgraded to 2008 R2 domain Controllers and the samba server that we currently have is not authenticating With the new domain controllers. Could you please let me know which version of Samba

Will the find from acts_as_paranoid filter down to an :include? For instance class parent acts_as_paranoid has_many: children end and class child acts_as_paranoid belongs_to :parent end Then if you Parent.find(:all, :include => children) you will get all the children if they are deleted or not. I guess the find that filters out the deleted_at is null does not filter down to the includes

Here''s the full error: 1) Error: test_add_message_to_existing_ticket(TicketTest): ArgumentError: Unknown key(s): group /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-1.2.4/lib/active_support/core_ext/hash/keys.rb:48:in `assert_valid_keys'' /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/acts_as_paranoid-0.2/lib/acts_as_paranoid.rb:125:in `validate_find_options''

Hi I have a table where I need to identify one of the children as the "prime" child. So, its like: Parent has_many :Child has_one: Child :as :prime_child (?) or something like that? Do I put something like prime_child_id in the Parent table? Thanks. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this

I''ve got a problem in that users are deleting a paranoid model through the application, including dependents. Some of these dependents are paranoid too, but not the attachments. (I''m using DB file storage.) I need to be able to un-delete these things and I''m now wondering if acts_as_paranoid will work with models that use attachment_fu? If so, in what model to I add the

Guys, I am trying to figure out what exactly does this line do at the end of "acts_as_paranoid" plugin? ActiveRecord::Base.send :include, Caboose::Acts::Paranoid::ActiveRecord My problem: I have some classes that I use acts_as_paranoid, and others with tagging support. Classes declared as taggable, throw error, which appears to be in the acts_as_paranoid version of the

Hello! I am trying to figure out how to implement *logical deletes* instead of physical deletes using ActiveRecord. Basically, in many applications that deal with E-Commerce, you really can''t physically delete almost anything, because records must be kept for auditing and customer service tracking purposes. In the past, I''ve implemented logical deletes as follows: 1.

How would I go about setting up my rails applications to soft delete items from the database rather than actually deleting it. I would imagine that I need to over ride the methods from ActiveRecord. Where would I do this would it be in the model? enviroment.rb? I would imagine that if i wanted it throughout my entire application it would need to be in the enviroment.rb. Also to

Looks like Rails 1.1.0 RC1 is finally here: http://dev.rubyonrails.org/changeset/4010 -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Hi, I''ve run into two small problems with acts_as_paranoid and wondered if anyone else has experienced them as well (and if yes, if they have any solutions). 1. When using has_many :through, AAP doesn''t seem to take into account the fact that your join model might also be paranoid. My solution to this at the moment is to add an explicit conditions clause to the has_many

Hi all, Stuck at this problem for several days. Tried to use named_scope, scope_out, and plugin such as searchlogic, but no result. The problem is as follows: I have a pic table and tag table, and a join table called pic_tag (with only pic_id and tag_id) so that I can associate N pics to M tags. This is the tutorial way to set up a many- to-many association. I''m trying to implement a

Acts_as_paranoid is giving me a headache when performing migrations. For some reason when I perform a migration I get a "stack level too deep" error. If I comment out the database inserts that are performed (countries, regions, and a base admin) it works well. Even after minimizing the data that is inserted on the migration to one record it still throws the same error. When running