Use custom auto-attributes if specified in the model

[Esya]

This pullrequest goes along with the one I did for water-line schema here and implements #754

It allows users to specify custom names for the automatic timestamp attributes, they just need to pass a string instead of true or false.

Let me know if it is fine like this and I will update the documentation accordingly.

The Travis build will fail while the PR on waterline-schema is not merged, because my tests will not succeed, but all the older tests remain intact

Edit by @dmarcelino: Pending tasks:

• Merge PR Adds custom automatic attribute names waterline-schema#23;
• Bump waterline-schema version and release it;
• Update waterline's package.json to use latest waterline-schema version;
• Merge docs Add docs for custom automatic timestamp attributes waterline-docs#60.

[devinivy]

Is there any reasonable way to refactor this so that the updatedAt and createdAt default values are enforced only by waterline-schema, and not by both waterline and waterline-schema? See my comment here: balderdashy/waterline-schema#23 (comment).

[Esya]

@devinivy Done

Please be aware that now it needs the other PR on waterline-schema to be merged first.

[devinivy]

✔️ Love it!

[dmarcelino]

I'm good with this ✅

Just to be clear, in order to merge this PR we first need to:

• Merge PR Adds custom automatic attribute names waterline-schema#23;
• Bump waterline-schema version and release it;
• Update waterline's package.json to use latest waterline-schema version.

Right?

[devinivy]

And update docs?

[dmarcelino]

Probably https://github.com/balderdashy/waterline-docs/blob/master/models.md will need an update.

[Esya]

@dmarcelino that sounds about right! Just added a PR for the documentation, feel free to change the wording if needed.

[dmarcelino]

It seems the linting changes created a merge conflict. We'll need to address those before merging this PR.

[particlebanana]

Yeah looking at it now

[particlebanana]

Rebased and submitted again as #1090

[particlebanana]

@dmarcelino @devinivy should we also go ahead and look at adding the same logic for autoPK?

[devinivy]

Seems like that would keep things nice and symmetrical!

[dmarcelino]

Yes, I think it makes sense for autoPK to behave in the same way.

Thanks @Esya! 🍻