Skip to content

Conversation

fabionl
Copy link

@fabionl fabionl commented Aug 8, 2021

Summary

My experience shows that end users tend to understand Yes/No pair better than True/False. This is a very common case in my projects when consuming CSV files provided by users, for example. As it seems to me that Yes/No are not ambiguous terms, I'm hoping ActiveModel could handle them without any major risks to existing codebases.

Other Information

I looked at the documentation and I believe it doesn't need to be changed, but I'm glad to make further changes as seen fit.
I believe this is self containing? Happy to edit if I'm missing any information.

@rails-bot rails-bot bot added the activemodel label Aug 8, 2021
@fabionl
Copy link
Author

fabionl commented Sep 3, 2021

Any chance of receiving guidance from someone on this? I wonder what else I could do to move forward.

@DRBragg
Copy link
Contributor

DRBragg commented Sep 17, 2021

FWIW I'm pro this change!

@rails-bot
Copy link

rails-bot bot commented Dec 16, 2021

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.
Thank you for your contributions.

@rails-bot rails-bot bot added the stale label Dec 16, 2021
@fabionl
Copy link
Author

fabionl commented Dec 16, 2021

Is there an interest to move forward with this change? Am I still missing something? I'm willing to make any further changes that might help.

@rails-bot rails-bot bot removed the stale label Dec 16, 2021
@rafaelfranca
Copy link
Member

We prefer to not change this type in Rails since it can break existing applications. But feel free to define your own Boolean type and change the type registry to use your type by default.

@fabionl fabionl deleted the fabionl/activemodel_add_yes_no_to_boolean_type branch December 20, 2021 22:32
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants