Aaron

i'm hesitant to do any roles where a shared user is == to the creator of the password(multiple owner). Which is why I like the idea of owner not being a role but an association through the user table ( has_one :owner, class: "User"). Now I can create a 'full_access" role where a user can do and see all of the things the owner can, but can't remove the owner. This way even the owner can't accidentally change their role because it's not in the list.

maybe you mention this later on but creating a unique restraint on user_passwords is probably better than destroy_all.

I know it's intended to be a more contrived example but I'd also want to be able to remove a user from all passwords if, for instance, "we broke up" lol. So something like a user_shared join table and then make the user_passwords dependent on destroy. ¯_(ツ)_/¯

ok, I was looking for section 8 in the stripe docs, was LOST in the first 7 md files.

Also if the docs were less cryptic it would be helpful, maybe an example app.

I'm not understanding how the pay docs and this video are so different. ¯_(ツ)_/¯ Has it changed that much?

Imma have to watch this a couple more times.

Nice! I used STI for an app with all types of documents, and I used the jsonb_accessor gem. It allows you to query the json fields just as if it were an active record column.

so my documents had just four columns but within the json column the table really looked more like this...

And I could just say InsuranceDocument.account_id even though it was technically InsuranceDocument.customData["account_id"]

I'm interested in delegated types as well.

Hey, do you know if you can upload to a folder structure within an s3 bucket? I'm planning on having users (who have UUID's) to have direct uploads behind the scenes to UUID/filename (virtual folder... would hopefully be created if it wasn't there), I've read ActiveStorage didn't support it but it was an older article. If not, I wonder how significant of a risk it would be to just have all files in a bucket.

Cat is a superstar. There's something about interruptions that makes things more funny and authentic. So if this basically the first step before extracting this to a ruby gem to build an sdk/wrapper? I'm going to watch that course next.

Same thoughts. However, there has to be a limit as to what a "responsibility" is. To make it more general you would say it's to set up Digital Ocean. Otherwise you can keep abstracting the responsibilities until you just have one line files. I think more in moderation especially for the framework.

🤦🏻‍♂️ oh yeah. Thanks.

if you placed those classes in app/scripts wouldn't you have to wrap them in a module Scripts?

I just upgraded an enterprise Rails 6 sprockets 3 app to rails 7, that used webpacker 4 built css and renders react components occasionally. It's about 8 years old so it was the craziest upgrade. I tried shakapacker, vite-rails, esbuild, cssbundling, and pretty much anything in between. What ultimately ended up working was unwinding the scss from webpacker, and then going to sprockets 4 and dartsass-rails. once the site worked exactly the same, I went to jsbundling-rails with esbuild and slowly moved each entrypoint to their new app/javascript folder. I wanted to get the file structure back to a more rails default instead of ui > js > sccs. (although I left all the react-rails files in the ui folders). I didn't need to do any jquery import fixes. I just added //= require jquery3 in the assets/javascripts jquery.js file. Then load javascript_include_tag "jquery" in application.html

I'll probably write up a blog post about challenges of upgrading an app that had over 30 contributors over almost a decade.