*Issue:* https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/21237
*Pull-request:* https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/22967
Hi!
This past January, Richard Schneeman came up with a idea for preventing
undesired destructive actions on the production database.
Good!
It was implemented via the introduction of
> However, people expressed some concerns related to the database pollution
> this creates.
>
> I would like to share a proposal:
Thanks, but as you noted, this was discussed and decided 6 months ago, and has
now shipped.
That doesn’t preclude all further discussion, of course.. but it does
Hi Matthew,
I completely understand.
I would like to give it another chance:
The migration process of the new proposal should be backwards compatible,
the people could ignore the "ar_internal_metadata" table or delete it (even
include a deprecation warning). If I assume the effort of the
impl
The `ar_internal_metadata` is tiny. I wouldn't consider it database pollution
any more than the schema migration table. It's actually much smaller.
> Rails should check if the configuration of the connection that is being used
>is the same as the one in the list of "protected_environments"
This
Understood. Thanks Richard!
On Friday, July 8, 2016 at 5:08:01 PM UTC+2, richard schneeman wrote:
>
> The `ar_internal_metadata` is tiny. I wouldn't consider it database
> pollution any more than the schema migration table. It's actually much
> smaller.
>
> > Rails should check if the configurat
