resources :leagues do
resources :schedule
end
This generates:
leagues/:id
leagues/:league_id/schedule/:id
How can I keep the league ID from changing param names? So it'll be:
leagues/:id
leagues/:id/schedule/:schedule_id
resources :leagues do
resources :schedule
end
This generates:
leagues/:id
leagues/:league_id/schedule/:id
How can I keep the league ID from changing param names? So it'll be:
leagues/:id
leagues/:id/schedule/:schedule_id
It appends the ID to the nested_param which is a bummer because I would like mine to be without the singular name. It looks like they really don't want you to make it only like
:id
as it could have conflicts. Plus it would be a bit of a diff from the normal restful routing that rails likes to use.https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/5368f2508651c92fbae40cd679afbafdd7e98e77/actionpack/lib/action_dispatch/routing/mapper.rb#L1207
Rake routes returns the following
So the solution which seams simpler is to just change the controller to use the nested param name it creates.
You can set "param" option on resource route to override the default "id" param:
refs to the Rails Routing Doc: http://guides.rubyonrails.org/routing.html#overriding-named-route-parameters
No, please do not do this.
The reason for it being this way is that it provides a common interface for nested resources across every single application. By making it different in your application, you're effectively going "against the grain" of Rails. Rails has a strict set of conventions that you should stick to. When you stray from this path, things get messy.
However, if you do want to shoot yourself in the foot, metaphorically speaking, you will need to define the routes manually. Here's the routes for the seven standard actions in a controller:
As you can see, it's quite ugly. But, if you really really really want to do it this way, that's how you'd do it.