| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Conflicts:
activerecord/lib/active_record/connection_adapters/postgresql_adapter.rb
|
| | |
| |
| | |
In response to this rails issue: https://github.com/rails/rails/issues/3729
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| |/ |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Method invalid_asset_host! was delegated to controller but sprockets
compile assets in their own scope without controller. And if we set asset_host
with second parameter it should raise error through invalid_asset_host!.
But since controller is nil it cannot be reached.
|
| |
|
| |
Since it uses request and response methods
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
computation *Jeremy Kemper/DHH*
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Many named routes have keys that are required to successfully resolve. If a key is left off like this:
<%= link_to 'user', user_path %>
This will produce an error like this:
No route matches {:action=>"show", :controller=>"users"}
Since we know that the :id is missing, we can add extra debugging information to the error message.
No route matches {:action=>"show", :controller=>"users"} missing required keys: [:id]
This will help new and seasoned developers look closer at their parameters. I've also subclassed the routing error to be clear that this error is a result of attempting to generate a url and not because the user is trying to visit a bad url.
While this may sound trivial this error message is misleading and confuses most developers. The important part isn't what's in the options its's what's missing. Adding this information to the error message will make debugging much more obvious.
This is the sister pull request of https://github.com/rails/journey/pull/44 which will be required to get they missing keys into the correct error message.
Example Development Error in Rails: http://cl.ly/image/3S0T0n1T3421
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Methods provided by RecordIdentifier are not widely used in controllers
nowadays as they're view specific (this is probably a legacy left after
RJS rendering directly in controllers). However if people still need to
use it, it's trivial to include ActionView::RecordIdentifier by
themselves.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
When module is extended ActiveSupport::Concern, include calls are lazily
loaded, so there is no need to wrap it with included hook.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This is another step in moving Action View's dependencies in Action Pack
to Action View itself. Also, HtmlScanner seems to be better suited for
views rather than controllers.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Since it's more about DOM classes and ids it belongs to Action View
better. What's more, it's more convenient to make it part of Action View
to follow the rule that Action Pack can depend on Action View, but not
the other way round.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Since Action View should not depend on actionpack, it's best to delegate
invalid_asset_host! to controller and just rely on such simple contract
instead of raising ActionController::RoutingError directly.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
This functionality will be available from gem
`active_record-session_store` instead.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The new option allows any Ruby namespace to be registered and set
up for eager load. We are effectively exposing the structure existing
in Rails since v3.0 for all developers in order to make their applications
thread-safe and CoW friendly.
|
| |\ |
|
| | | |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| | |
their own header object
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
When you mount your application at a path, for example /myapp, server
should set SCRIPT_NAME to /myapp. With such information, rails
application knows that it's mounted at /myapp path and it should generate
routes relative to that path.
Before this patch, rails handled SCRIPT_NAME correctly only for regular
apps, but it failed to do it for mounted engines. The solution was to
hardcode default_url_options[:script_name], which is not the best answer
- it will work only when application is mounted at a fixed path.
This patch fixes the situation by respecting original value of
SCRIPT_NAME when generating application's routes from engine and the
other way round - when you generate engine's routes from application.
This is done by using one of 2 pieces of information in env - current
SCRIPT_NAME or SCRIPT_NAME for a corresponding router. This is because
we have 2 cases to handle:
- generating engine's route from application: in this situation
SCRIPT_NAME is basically SCRIPT_NAME set by the server and it
indicates the place where application is mounted, so we can just pass
it as :original_script_name in url_options. :original_script_name is
used because if we use :script_name, router will ignore generating
prefix for engine
- generating application's route from engine: in this situation we
already lost information about the SCRIPT_NAME that server used. For
example if application is mounted at /myapp and engine is mounted at
/blog, at this point SCRIPT_NAME is equal /myapp/blog. Because of that
we need to keep reference to /myapp SCRIPT_NAME by binding it to the
current router. Later on we can extract it and use when generating url
Please note that starting from now you *should not* use
default_url_options[:script_name] explicitly if your server already
passes correct SCRIPT_NAME to rack env.
(closes #6933)
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
by Active Support)
Selecting which key extensions to include in active_support/rails
made apparent the systematic usage of Object#in? in the code base.
After some discussion in
https://github.com/rails/rails/commit/5ea6b0df9a36d033f21b52049426257a4637028d
we decided to remove it and use plain Ruby, which seems enough
for this particular idiom.
In this commit the refactor has been made case by case. Sometimes
include? is the natural alternative, others a simple || is the
way you actually spell the condition in your head, others a case
statement seems more appropriate. I have chosen the one I liked
the most in each case.
|
| |/ |
|
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Conflicts:
activemodel/lib/active_model/secure_password.rb
activerecord/lib/active_record/associations/collection_proxy.rb
|
| | |
| |
| |
| | |
HTTP Token authentication in integration tests
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
single check.
Rails includes a single character body to a head(:no_content) response to work around an old Safari bug where headers were ignored if no body sent.
This patch brings the behavior slightly closer to spec if :no_content/204 is explicity requested via a head only response.
Status comparison done on symbolic and numeric values
Not returning any content when responding with head and limited to a status code that explicitly states no content will be returned - 100..199, 204, 205, 304.
|
| |\ \
| | |
| | | |
Fix for digest authentication bug - issue #2301 in rails/rails
|
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
|
| |/ / |
|
| |\ \
| | |
| | | |
Follow code conventions in metal/live
|
| | | | |
|
| |/ / |
|
| | | |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| | |
will work
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
