Maximilian Berghoff

No. There is no extra Field. My solution tries to connect entitys/documents as One-to-One relation, that live in different doctrines. The reference is a pure configuration on the entity/document very...

That sounds like a plan. In general this enhancer would easily add the [method]Action to a given controller as a a service key. The _content isn't touched and should be...

Doing so i would add some configuration options combined with Service definitions based on field_by_class enhancer in the bundle only? I would lose the the http method Information. But that...

I could add a list of controller:[method]Action pairs per content class.

That looks cool and sounds right. I just need to get the configuration to that point. BundleExtension and enhancer should be no problem. I don't think we need FosRest for...

So is there a chance to create an Enhancer, which would use FosRest Magic for that mapping? The only Routing i usualy do by FosRest is the Anotation one.

I currently have no idea how to merge those both behaviors. So i will implement it our way. I will start on it on my "empty" RestBundle, where i implemented...

Uhh nice. That sounds even better. @WouterJ You have an example for me? But i think yours should be closer to the original one.

Ahh ... I think our Solution is the wrong direction. Usually we do not map multiple methods on a single controller action. We can handle multiple ContentClasses by one action,...

Ok. @WouterJ convinced. I just whanted to avoid to much configuration. Defining each method to action mapping sounds like a step into a kind of a static routing. Other pro...