Comments on: Rails Refactor Update (and Merb 1.0.7.1)

By: Dado

Dado — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 18:55:40 +0000

I too prefer the Merb convention. Both the “old-Rails” convention (for backward compatibility) as well as the new “Merb” convention should be supported. I don’t know how controllers are looked up in Rails 1 and 2, but if instead of naming conventions one looks for classes that inherits from ActionController::Base that should be enough to support whatever naming conventions one might like.

By: rick

rick — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 17:14:34 +0000

We just discussed this, and will likely support the merb style convention, but go with the rails convention by default. The rails convention is to separate the domain from the infrastructure. Models = domain, Controllers/Helpers = the infrastructure. This shouldn’t affect your existing apps, and should be easy to change in new Rails 3 apps if you desire.

By: teamon

teamon — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 14:52:43 +0000

I think it will be xxController cause of compatibility
(and yes, I dont like it)

By: solnic

solnic — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 14:01:14 +0000

Thanks for the update and BTW – are you going to go with Merb naming convention for controllers or leave Rails-style (with “Controller” suffix)?