Hey, so you're saying that you are using the same resource names (notes, tags) but you want those routes to go to different controllers?
map.resources :customers do |customer| customer.resources :notes, :controller => 'customer_notes' customer.resources :tags, :controller => 'customer_tags' end map.resources :products do |product| customer.resources :notes, :controller => 'product_notes' customer.resources :tags, :controller => 'product_tags' end In edge-rails your url helpers will automatically be name-prefixed so: customer_notes_path #=> /customer/3/notes, controller == CustomerNotesController etc etc HTH, Trevor On 18-Jul-07, at 12:01 PM, Peter wrote: > > Hi, > > I was wondering if anyone came across a similar scenario when working > with namespaced routes with edge rails. > > Consider an application with controllers customers and products that > also have other resources. > > map.resources :customers do |customer| > customer.resources :notes > customer.resources :tags > end > > map.resources :products do |product| > customer.resources :notes > customer.resources :tags > end > > Now of course this poses a problem as it stands because the notes and > tags controllers will conflict. I know there are polymorphic routes/ > controllers (http://revolutiononrails.blogspot.com/2007/05/drying-up- > polymorphic-controllers.html) however this doesnt make sense if the > controllers have little shared logic/behaviour; only a common name. I > know I can just use a different name, but with the addition of > namespaces this should no longer be a concern with a proper design. > > So.. I'm thinking something like: > > /app/controllers/customers/root_controller.rb > /app/controllers/customers/tags_controller.rb > /app/controllers/customers/notes_controller.rb > /app/controllers/products/root_controller.rb > /app/controllers/products/tags_controller.rb > /app/controllers/products/notes_controller.rb > > with routes like: > > map.namespace(:customers) do |customers| > customers.resources :root, :has_many => [:tags, :notes] > end > map.namespace(:products) do |products| > products.resources :root, :has_many => [:tags, :notes] > end > > creating routes like: > /customers/root/#{root_id} > /customers/root/#{root_id}/tags/#{id} > /customers/root/#{root_id}/notes/#{id > /products/root/#{root_id} > /products/root/#{root_id}/tags/#{id} > /products/root/#{root_id}/notes/#{id > > This will work. But we have an unnecessary /root/ in the route. I > suppose the solution would be adding a flag to the namespace function > to pass a root controller with a default name of "root_controller" so > the root of the namespace can itself be a resource. Can this be done? > What do you guys think about it as an addition to rails? > > This leads me to another scenario. Namespaced models.... quite simply > as it stands you can in /app/models/ make a folder called /customer/ > there add tag.rb and note.rb. With models Customer::Tag and > Customer::Note. One thing is the table_name will remain "tags" and > "notes", which in this case should be prefixed by the namespace name > like "customer_tags" and "customer_notes". Also with the ability to > have a root model like Customer in /customer/root.rb. > > I'd love to hear that this can already be done as rails stands. I can > make the patches and submit them, however I don't want to divulge from > other design considerations. > > Regards, > > Peter > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
