[Rails-core] Feature Request: Track habtm changes
Hey guys,
What do you think about tracking habtm changes?
Apparently we can't do that because when you change a habtm association it
is changed immediately on database instead of waiting the save call (not
sure why and the problem may not be because of that).
Current behaviour:
profile.roles_ids
= []
profile.update_attributes(:name = nil, :roles_ids = [...])
= false
profile.changes
{ name = ['Admin', nil] }
Expected behaviour:
profile.roles_ids
= []
profile.update_attributes(:name = nil, :roles_ids = [...])
= false
profile.changes
{ name = ['Admin', nil], :roles_ids = [[], [...]] }
Giving some problem context, I have an application that need to audit
almost every change and I can track everything using the changes method but
habtm changes.
We can write a solution like storing the initial state of roles_ids in an
after_initialize callback on the model and comparing it on a after_save but
I was thinking in a more native solution.
What do you think?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Ruby
on Rails: Core group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to rubyonrails-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
[Rails-core] Re: Feature Request: Track habtm changes
Not sure about how it will impact the application but this is the first
shot: https://gist.github.com/sobrinho/6309391
On Thursday, August 22, 2013 12:56:27 PM UTC-3, Gabriel Sobrinho wrote:
Hey guys,
What do you think about tracking habtm changes?
Apparently we can't do that because when you change a habtm association it
is changed immediately on database instead of waiting the save call (not
sure why and the problem may not be because of that).
Current behaviour:
profile.roles_ids
= []
profile.update_attributes(:name = nil, :roles_ids = [...])
= false
profile.changes
{ name = ['Admin', nil] }
Expected behaviour:
profile.roles_ids
= []
profile.update_attributes(:name = nil, :roles_ids = [...])
= false
profile.changes
{ name = ['Admin', nil], :roles_ids = [[], [...]] }
Giving some problem context, I have an application that need to audit
almost every change and I can track everything using the changes method but
habtm changes.
We can write a solution like storing the initial state of roles_ids in an
after_initialize callback on the model and comparing it on a after_save but
I was thinking in a more native solution.
What do you think?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Ruby
on Rails: Core group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to rubyonrails-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [Rails-core] Feature Request: Track habtm changes
On Aug 22, 2013, at 11:56 AM, Gabriel Sobrinho wrote:
Hey guys,
What do you think about tracking habtm changes?
Apparently we can't do that because when you change a habtm association it is
changed immediately on database instead of waiting the save call (not sure
why and the problem may not be because of that).
Current behaviour:
profile.roles_ids
= []
profile.update_attributes(:name = nil, :roles_ids = [...])
= false
profile.changes
{ name = ['Admin', nil] }
Expected behaviour:
profile.roles_ids
= []
profile.update_attributes(:name = nil, :roles_ids = [...])
= false
profile.changes
{ name = ['Admin', nil], :roles_ids = [[], [...]] }
Giving some problem context, I have an application that need to audit almost
every change and I can track everything using the changes method but habtm
changes.
We can write a solution like storing the initial state of roles_ids in an
after_initialize callback on the model and comparing it on a after_save but I
was thinking in a more native solution.
What do you think?
Some quick thoughts:
* using the _ids= method on has_many doesn't show up in changes either
* this could get really expensive if you have a lot of rows on the other end of
the HABTM, since you cache the complete list of IDs in memory
--Matt Jones
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Ruby
on Rails: Core group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to rubyonrails-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [Rails-core] Backport PR etiquette
Also, if you open a backport PR immediately, and we decide not to accept the patch, it's just clutter. Better to get it actually merged first, then backport. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Ruby on Rails: Core group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
