-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 168
User model present in model-config.json #103
Comments
@greaterweb It is intentional. Note that |
cc @crandmck -- we really should get this fixed lol still going around |
Thank you for the prompt response. Could you please explain why you would need the builtin Is something different in v3 which has this as the recommended approach? I don't have any instances where the builtin model was required in addition to the model I created. It's not entirely clear in this repo why you would need both and I can't find anything in the docs supporting the need to do so. I realize the issue system isn't intended to be a support mechanism but in this case this ticket is actually secondary to a bug I'm was about to submit to the main loopback repo. |
@greaterweb The builtin
I don't believe anything is different in LB with regards to the usage of the builtin User model -- if you remove it, you'll have to hook up your own to make up for the parts LoopBack is expecting OOB. |
@superkhau you may wish to follow the discussions in strongloop/loopback#3215 I guess what we are really looking at is the larger topic on whether or not it is required to include the |
Yes, I saw your comment with @raymondfeng (especially this one strongloop/loopback#3215 (comment)) which is correct. I wasn't sure if you could've removed |
The general concept of extending the User model for your own purposes is laid out pretty clearly in Also, if something did change wrt this between v2 & v3, then we definitely need to document it. I certainly was not aware of it! Please advise. Even if it's a bug that we fix, we should say in the RNs which v3 versions are affected. |
The bug is being handled by @miroslav at strongloop/loopback#3215 (comment) already. No doc changes are required ATM. What I meant was change the |
Oh, right... It would be a good change, and should be relatively straightforward. Perhaps something for @siddhipai ? |
@crandmck Good idea. :) |
@siddhipai See #73, reassigning this to you. Also try to go through his example when you have time too. |
Bug or feature request
Additional information (Node.js version, LoopBack version, etc)
Both the base
User
model and a customuser
model (which extendsUser
) are present in themodel-config.json
. I don't believe this is intentional and the baseUser
model should be removed from the config.At the minimum it is confusing for files such as
common/models/user.js
, it is not immediately clear which model this would apply to.To resolve, the base
User
model should be removed or the customuser
model should be renamed to something else such asAccount
.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: