Add option to "undecorate" resource for forms

[amiel]

This pull-request adds the following option:

ActiveAdmin.register MyModel do
  decorate_with MyModelDecorator

  # Calls `model` on resource before calling semantic_form_for
  form decorate: false do
    # ...
  end

end

This also adds more coverage for ActiveAdmin::ViewHelpers::FormHelper.active_admin_form_for (specs not specific to this pull-request).

See discussion at #2057.

[seanlinsley]

These four lines of code are really hard to follow. It seems like all you want is this:

if should = options.delete :undecorate
  resource = resource.send should==true ? :model : should
end

[amiel]

@daxter I agree, but does the api concept even make sense?

[seanlinsley]

So the changes I made above removed the (unnecessary) undecorate_with option, providing the same functionality through the undecorate option.

Whether or not you adopt those changes, could you please explain what happens when you call .model, and what sorts of other options someone might want to pass in?

[macfanatic]

Personally, I would rather see the simplest DSL:

ActiveAdmin.register Post do
  decorate_with PostsDecorator
  form decorated: false, partial: 'form'
end

Accept true/false & move on. Why would we need to accept a symbol as a method name to call on the decorator to get the original resource, if you can just get the resource from the decorator when you pass false in? Technically we are not tying you to Draper, but I think using the :model method to get the resource instance from the decorator is a safe assumption.

[seanlinsley]

+1 on the decorated: false syntax. @amiel, is there any other value you might want to pass in?

[amiel]

@daxter @macfanatic that works for me, I like it. I just wasn't sure if the customized method call might be useful for something else...

[seanlinsley]

If such a time comes, we can always change it later :)

On Apr 10, 2013, at 11:24 AM, Amiel Martin notifications@github.com wrote:

@daxter @macfanatic that works for me, I like it. I just wasn't sure if the customized method call might be useful for something else...

�
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[amiel]

@daxter +1 for YAGNI. Ok, I'll change the documentation to include this, and I think it should be ready to go.

[amiel]

Thanks guys! :)

[seanlinsley]

Thanks to you for putting in the effort