I agree with you both. I've used the updated_at or created_at flag several times without caring about updated_by or created_by. On the other hand, if somebody sent in a patch to get me created_by for free, I'd use it.
In other words, I don't think it's useful enough to add to Hobo myself, but if somebody went to the effort, I'd test it and apply it unless Tom had an objection. cheers, Bryan Henry Baragar wrote: > Agreed, many cases it does not make sense. But, it seems to me that the > cases > where it does not make sense are the cases where it does not make sense to > have have timestamps. > > That is, given that we have a User model, does anyone care about > last_updated_at but not last_update_by? > > Put another way why have keep the timestamps, particularly the > last_updated_at, if we are not keep the associated users? And, it seems that > enough people want both that we have the short cut, which is also the > default, > of including both timestamps. > > Regards, > Henry > > On August 26, 2009 01:37:40 pm kevinpfromnm wrote: >> I'm not sure about that. Many cases it doesn't make sense. In fact, >> probably a large majority of models don't need the concept of an owner >> much less a last touched by. I'm probably at a 10-20% of models >> needing an owner and none with an updater. I think if you need an >> updater, you probably should go further and implement some sort of >> versioning or at least auditing alongside it. Most of the time you >> need to know who made a change, you want to know the whole history of >> a particular object. >> >> If you have a case where you find you need that same function over and >> over and maybe permissions to go along with it, probably best to move >> it off into a module similar to the owned_model from hobo cookbook. >> >> On Aug 26, 9:41 am, Henry Baragar <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >>> Matt, >>> >>> Although it can be done like that, my thought is that userstamps should >>> be added to the Hobo model generation, so that everyone gets it >>> automatically. >>> >>> That is, in the file: >>> >>> vendor/plugins/hobo/hobofields/rails_generators/hobofield_model/templates >>> /model.rb.erb >>> >>> replace "timestamps" with "userstamps". (And add the necessary code to >>> after_create and after_save). >>> >>> Regards, >>> Henry >>> >>> On August 21, 2009 05:51:34 pm Matt Jones wrote: >>>> Well, some of this is already present. If you set an association: >>>> >>>> belongs_to :creator, :class_name => 'User', :creator => true >>>> >>>> It will automatically associate created records to that user. You can >>>> also (I seem to recall) set :creator => true on a string field, which >>>> gets the creating user's name_attribute value. >>>> >>>> I've not seen a lot of use cases for updated_by, but it should be >>>> doable in a before_save callback, I believe. >>>> >>>> --Matt Jones >>>> >>>> On Aug 21, 2009, at 4:26 PM, Henry Baragar wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> It occurs to me that the "timestamps" directive in Rails would have >>>>> a corresponding "userstamps" in hobo that would include: >>>>> • created_by: belonging to user set upon creation >>>>> • updated_by: belonging_to user and set upon update >>>>> because Hobo adds a user model to the Rails framework. This would >>>>> make the timestamps much more useful, IMHO. >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Henry >>>>> >>>>> Henry Baragar >>>>> Instantiated Software >>> -- >>> >>> Henry Baragar >>> Instantiated Software >> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hobo Users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hobousers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
