How to add a collection2 schema to users collection using accounts-password package in meteorjs?

Question

So, I have just started a meteor project and have included the accounts-password package. The package only supports few keys. I want to add a new SimpleSchema to the users collection with some more fields.

I am not given to create another instance of users collection with

@users = Mongo.Collection('users');
//Error: A method named '/users/insert' is already defined

I can attach a schema but will be forced to keep alot of fields optional, and may not be able to register with the default package otherwise.

Can I add simpleSchema without making other fields optional and still be able to login properly?

Or is there any other work around for this case?

Thank you for help in advance

Answer 1

You can get users collection with:

@users = Meteor.users;

You can find nice example of defining user collection in the docs of collection2 package: https://atmospherejs.com/aldeed/collection2

Schema = {};
Schema.User = new SimpleSchema({
    username: {
        type: String,
        regEx: /^[a-z0-9A-Z_]{3,15}$/
    },
    emails: {
        type: [Object],
        // this must be optional if you also use other login services like facebook,
        // but if you use only accounts-password, then it can be required
        optional: true
    },
    "emails.$.address": {
        type: String,
        regEx: SimpleSchema.RegEx.Email
    },
    "emails.$.verified": {
        type: Boolean
    },
    createdAt: {
        type: Date
    },
    profile: {
        type: Schema.UserProfile,
        optional: true
    },
    services: {
        type: Object,
        optional: true,
        blackbox: true
    },
    // Add `roles` to your schema if you use the meteor-roles package.
    // Option 1: Object type
    // If you specify that type as Object, you must also specify the
    // `Roles.GLOBAL_GROUP` group whenever you add a user to a role.
    // Example:
    // Roles.addUsersToRoles(userId, ["admin"], Roles.GLOBAL_GROUP);
    // You can't mix and match adding with and without a group since
    // you will fail validation in some cases.
    roles: {
        type: Object,
        optional: true,
        blackbox: true
    },
    // Option 2: [String] type
    // If you are sure you will never need to use role groups, then
    // you can specify [String] as the type
    roles: {
        type: [String],
        optional: true
    }
});

Answer 2

You have three ways to adapt for the attach of a schema to such a collection:

• Make every new field optional.
• Have default values (friends defaults to [] for example).
• Update the UI to include new mandatory elements (a radio for "P = NP" or "P != NP").

Each option is somewhat valid in itself. Chose what seems the most logical in the current context and what will give you the least headaches.

Do you absolutely need a user-given value for someField when he registers? Then you have to update the UI to fetch this value.
Is the presence of someField important, and it can be initialized to a default object (an empty array, null, 0...)? Then a default value will fit, and it will be added when Collection2 cleans the document.
None of the above? Optional.

---

As a somewhat personal note, I prefer this kind of code:

someUser.friends.forEach(sendGifts);

To this kind:

if(someUser.hasOwnProperty('friends')) {//Or _.has(someUser, 'friends') but it sounds sad
  someUser.friends.forEach(sendGifts);
}

In the second code friends is an optional field, so we're not sure if it's present or undefined. Calling forEach on undefined results in a nice big error, so we have to check for the field existence first... Thus, I would advise slightly avoiding optional fields for consistency and simplicity.