Controllers/views in sub-folders and broken routes

Rails
1

I’m having some issues with routing when using controllers in
sub-folders.

I have controllers in an admin folder that look like this:

class Admin::UsersController < ApplicationController
end

My link_to_remote calls look like this:

<%= link_to_remote ‘Users’, :url => { :controller => ‘admin/users’,
:action => :index } %>

And then when I deploy to production I get errors such as:

ActionView::MissingTemplate (Missing template admin/users.erb in view
path /rails/myapp/releases/20090203200508/app/views:):

In production it asks for the wrong template. It should be asking for
the template app/views/admin/users/index.html.erb like it does in
development.

I found if I add a route:

map.connect ‘admin/users’, :controller => ‘admin/users’, :action =>
‘index’

my link_to_remote calls do begin to work in both development and
production.

I do not want to add a route for every single url I have in my admin.
What’s the solution?

Using Rails 2.2.2.

Thanks,

–
Greg D.
http://destiney.com/

2

On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Greg D. [email protected] wrote:

I do not want to add a route for every single url I have in my admin.

Also, forgot to mention… I tried this:

map.connect ‘admin/:controller/:action/:id’

But I didn’t see any change.

Thanks,

–
Greg D.
http://destiney.com/

3

I don’t think you can supply :controller => “some_controller” in
link_to_remote, only :action and :id are valid. I think you should
embrace the resourceful way of doing things and add this to your
routes.rb file:

map.resources :users, :controller => ‘admin/users’, :name_prefix =>
‘admin_’

This would then give you many clean named routes, one of which is
admin_users_path which will link to what you want. Now you can put:

:url => admin_users_path

I have not tested this, but I’m pretty sure it will work.

4

Ah if only merb’s routes were in rails already

Anyway, what OTHER routes do you have in front of the default route?
Coz when you’re using namespaces controllers, it matters. Aside from
this, DHH has made it pretty clear this isn’t a great thing to do.

Blog: http://random8.zenunit.com/
Learn rails: http://sensei.zenunit.com/

5

On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 3:20 PM, Daly [email protected] wrote:

I don’t think you can supply :controller => “some_controller” in
link_to_remote,

I have about half-a-dozen Rails apps that say otherwise :slight_smile:

only :action and :id are valid. I think you should
embrace the resourceful way of doing things and add this to your
routes.rb file:

I do not want resources. I just want routes that work without adding
an entry for each url in routes.rb.

map.resources :users, :controller => ‘admin/users’, :name_prefix =>
‘admin_’

This would then give you many clean named routes, one of which is
admin_users_path which will link to what you want. Now you can put:

:url => admin_users_path

I have not tested this, but I’m pretty sure it will work.

Yes, it will, but that’s not what I want for this app. I just want my
admin controllers in a folder, that’s it.

Thanks all the same.

–
Greg D.
http://destiney.com/

6

On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Julian L. [email protected]
wrote:

Anyway, what OTHER routes do you have in front of the default route?
Coz when you’re using namespaces controllers, it matters. Aside from
this, DHH has made it pretty clear this isn’t a great thing to do.

Having a single admin controller with 807345029 lines of code in it
clearly isn’t a great thing to do either.

–
Greg D.
http://destiney.com/

7

On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 6:18 PM, Julian L. [email protected]
wrote:

No, but putting admin_ in front of your admin controllers is fine.

That’s not very DRY.

–
Greg D.
http://destiney.com/

8

So use a loop with send to map LOL. A class def is only ruby after all

Blog: http://random8.zenunit.com/
Learn rails: http://sensei.zenunit.com/

9

Here’s what I do in my app

%w[wip businesses people journal microsites brief reports
search].each do |controller_name|
map.connect “admin/#{controller_name}/:action/:id”, :controller
=> “admin_#{controller_name}”
end

I’m sure you could probably do something like this, too, tho it’s
untested:

%w[wip businesses people journal microsites brief reports
search].each do |controller_name|
map.connect “admin/#{controller_name}/:action/:id”, :controller
=> “admin/#{controller_name}”
end

10

No, but putting admin_ in front of your admin controllers is fine.

Blog: http://random8.zenunit.com/
Learn rails: http://sensei.zenunit.com/