While we are on the subject of potential changes, I asked in a previous thread about what's gonna happen to controller tests (functional tests in previous parlance) and got no response. I am asking for two reasons: 1. It was one of the proposed GSOC projects, so it is to be expected that someone picked it up, and 2. I think it's a mistake to deprecate them (the wording was to *unify* them with integration tests, but from what I read it seems that they'll essentially be deprecated) and I plan to write more on the subject if what I suspect is true. But perhaps suffice it to say that the renaming to controller tests alone has already eased most of the confusion out there.
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 9:11 PM, Sean Griffin <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't want to go into specifics because most of what I'm working on is > still high level ideas. I doubt that we'll see a separated persistence and > business logic layer land in Rails any time soon (though internally we're > actually becoming very close to that). However, we are continuing to break > things into smaller pieces which may eventually be made public and can be > re-used by other libraries like Virtus or ROM. > > One of the biggest places for this is having clearer lines between what > happens at the AR class level, vs the DB table level, and how the two > communicate. I'm hoping to reduce the number of places that take a class > object which inherits from AR::Base as part of their arguments, in favor of > objects which represent the concept they need, which again should help > reusability without having to inspect hundreds of methods across dozens of > modules to figure out what the expected interface actually is. > > I don't have anything specific other than rough ideas of where things need > to happen to get there, and this is all just ideas that may or may not > actually happen. My concern is more on improving maintainability of the > internals, hooks for gem makers, and fixing bugs, rather than user facing > API. Even if everything does happen, it might not result in anything that > you use in your rails apps. > > On Tuesday, November 25, 2014 7:09:57 AM UTC-7, Jason FB wrote: >> >> Rails core, >> >> I was wondering if Rails 5 has a discussed (or proposed) roadmap? A >> growing chorus of developers are seeking ways to separate domain logic from >> persistence logic at the model level. I was wondering from a bird’s-eye >> perspective if the framework plans to adopt patterns to make that easier >> (and more encouraged) to implement in the future? >> >> I tried to do a little googling for Rails 5 docs but I was unable to find >> solid stuff. >> >> -Jason >> >> >> ---- >> >> Jason Fleetwood-Boldt >> [email protected] >> http://www.jasonfleetwoodboldt.com/writing >> >> -- > 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 [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- Mohamed Wael Khobalatte -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
