It was removed in commit 128a8164 because we hadn't reviewed it nor
tested it properly. We're now adding it again, fixing the issues we've
found while reviewing.
Not doing so has a few gotchas when working with relations, particularly
with records which are not stored in the database.
I'm excluding the related content file because it's got a very peculiar
relationship with itself: the `has_one :opposite_related_content` has no
inverse; the relation itself is its inverse. It's a false positive since
the inverse condition is true:
```
content.opposite_related_content.opposite_related_content.object_id ==
content.object_id
```
Just like we do in the Budget module, and in some places in the Poll and
Legislation modules, we don't need to specify the class name when the
name of the relation matches the name of a class in the same module.
We were converting markdown to HTML every time we saved a record, which
has the same problems as sanitizing HTML before saving it to the
database, particularly because the body of a legislation draft is stored
in a translations table.
Performance-wise this isn't a problem: converting a text with more than
200_000 characters takes about a milisecond on my machine.
Note we need to modify a migration generated by globalize, since the
method `create_translation_table!` would fail now that we don't define
`translates :body_html` in the model.
This way we guarantee there will be at least one translation for a model
and we keep compatibility with the rest of the application, which
ideally isn't aware of globalize.
Updating it required reorganizing the form so translatable fields are
together.
We also needed to add a `hint` option to the form label and input
methods so the hint wouldn't show up for every language.
Finally, the markdown editor needed to use the same globalize attributes
as inputs, labels and hints, which adds a bit of duplication.
There's no reason to only convert Markdown to HTML in translations when
their body changes but to always convert it when the "main" body field
changes.
Whether we should always use the condition or never use it is something
we can debate about, though.
