On 3-Jan-10, at 9:48 PM, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
> This has been already discussed here, some time ago:
>
> https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994/tickets/1687-flexible-formatting-for-ar-validation-error-messages
I remember that discussion, and I think there was some
misunderstan
This has been already discussed here, some time ago:
https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994/tickets/1687-flexible-formatting-for-ar-validation-error-messages
The key point, in my opinion is that this should not be related to I18n
in my opinion. We should be able to specify the full messag
Yeah, that's the "I18n stuff" I mentioned in my reply to Sven, though
the rdoc that I found for generate_full_message was more cryptic and did
not mention that you can use the I18n capabilities to override the full
message.
It's good to know that setting the full_message can be achieved in this
Probably a recent documentation, the API docs are not updated often.
2010/1/4 George
> On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 6:30 PM, Ben Munat wrote:
>
>>
>> If that does exist in Rails 2.x.x somewhere I would really appreciate a
>> pointer.
>>
>>
> It's not on api.rubyonrails.org for some reason, but here's
On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 6:30 PM, Ben Munat wrote:
>
> If that does exist in Rails 2.x.x somewhere I would really appreciate a
> pointer.
>
>
It's not on api.rubyonrails.org for some reason, but here's the rdoc for
AR::Error#generate_full_message:
# Wraps an error message into a full_message
There's also the custom-err-msg plugin that allows this functionality by
doing :message => "^The field was invalid" which does not prefix the message
with the field name.
2010/1/4 Ben Munat
> Really? I see no mention of "full" anything here:
>
>
> http://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActiveRecord/
Really? I see no mention of "full" anything here:
http://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActiveRecord/Validations/ClassMethods.html
I tried a :full_message and :fullmessage option on a validation in a
model in a 2.3.4 project and a 2.3.5 project and both were ignored.
Googling for a means of suppre
It's possible since (iirc) 2.3.3.
I have no idea why people keep repeating it's not possible. Maybe a
documentation issue.
On Jan 3, 2010, at 11:15 PM, Ben Munat wrote:
> It has long been one of my annoyances that Rails doesn't make it easier
> to override the full error message for a validati
It has long been one of my annoyances that Rails doesn't make it easier
to override the full error message for a validation. At my job, the
product manager routinely asks for a specific validation message.
It's great that Rails will use a sensible default message, but being
able to specify full
Real fix: cd gem ; sudo gem install bundler ; sudo gem bundle
2557 tests, 11752 assertions, 0 failures, 0 errors
On Dec 31 2009, 11:13 pm, Student wrote:
> 7789663a7d8647f5a20c585dc177cbd18aace1c3
>
> rails/activesupport/lib/active_support/i18n.rb:1:in `require': no such
> file to load -- i18
Cookie verifier secret is just for the new cookies.signed option -
http://github.com/rails/rails/commit/0200e20f148c96afceeebc4da7b5985643f9f707.
It has nothing to do with the session secret.
On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 11:05 PM, Trevor Turk wrote:
> On Dec 29 2009, 7:48 am, Mislav Marohnić
> wrote:
On Dec 29 2009, 7:48 am, Mislav Marohnić
wrote:
> Rails application generator from current master creates two scripts in
> "config/initializers/": "cookie_verifier_secret.rb" and "session_store.rb".
> How do these two secret keys relate, and why are they generated different?
I'm also wondering ab
Installing the gems & requiring rubygems fixes these. The next
problem is a requirement for rack/test, which I cannot find anywhere:
diff --git a/actionpack/lib/action_view/template/handlers/erb.rb b/
actionpack/lib/action_view/template/handlers/erb.rb
index 93a4315..eee1760 100644
--- a/actionp
yeah - thx for ur input. i see the dilema. not very motivating since
webdav is still important, at least i think so. i just spent a few
hours with railsdav, havent gone through the whole thing yet since its
a little "confusing". but i hope it will make sense soon.
for now i guess i just have to fo
On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 8:16 AM, Ryan Bigg wrote:
> Hi Tom,
> the correct place for this would be on the rubyonrails-talk mailing list.
> This list is for Ruby on Rails core discussion. For help and assistance,
> check out the rubyonrails-talk mailing list.
That's very true, but...
As far as I kn
thx!
On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 8:16 AM, Ryan Bigg wrote:
> Hi Tom,
> the correct place for this would be on the rubyonrails-talk mailing list.
> This list is for Ruby on Rails core discussion. For help and assistance,
> check out the rubyonrails-talk mailing list.
>
> 2010/1/2 tom
>>
>> hi, not sur
Hi Sven, I hope you have had a great vacation!
I don't think that a full_message option would be a feature to be
explored by plugins only, for several reasons.
I18n different backend plugins make sense because some basic external
API are kept unchanged (I18n.translate/t) and we can test differe
Hi Tom,
the correct place for this would be on the rubyonrails-talk mailing list.
This list is for Ruby on Rails core discussion. For help and assistance,
check out the rubyonrails-talk mailing list.
2010/1/2 tom
> hi, not sure if
> a) this is the right spot
> b) railsdav is still "in use" or o
Sorry for not answering earlier here, just back from a vacation.
Tbh I have no idea about the state of AM validations in master. I was thinking
that José was working on it but maybe that's not true any more? In your email
you said that you'd be willing to work on this. That would be perfectly fi
hi, not sure if
a) this is the right spot
b) railsdav is still "in use" or other "plugins" are preferred
goal: to use webdav
i installed railsdav according to the guide on:
http://liverail.net/railsdav
i added
#controller
act_as_railsdav , basedir > public
def webdav #gets called via the routes.
20 matches
Mail list logo
