Rails core - May 2011 - Who is the maintainer for Active Resource? and/or who is interested in working on it?

There are a number of additional features I required for a current
project. I was able to solve some of these by using "Reactive
Resource" (https://github.com/justinweiss/reactive_resource) but many
I had to implement as override of various sorts. It seems like a
better solution would be to build some more flexibility into Active
Resource itself.

I notice that Active Resource hasn''t really changed since 3.0.0. Is
anybody working on this right now? Is there a maintainer I should talk
to regarding potential patches?

Thanks,

Nick

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

[Disclaimer: I''m not a core team member]

I think if you would, It''d be great if you''d fork it and
maintain it. I don''t really see much effort to it either, and I
don''t know how to *patch* it since I''m not using it regularly.

I think I''d then try to convince the core team to remove it, and then
suggest people to use that gem instead.

- Prem

On 12 พ.ค. 2554, at 17:49, Nick Urban wrote:
> There are a number of additional features I required for a current
> project. I was able to solve some of these by using "Reactive
> Resource" (https://github.com/justinweiss/reactive_resource) but many
> I had to implement as override of various sorts. It seems like a
> better solution would be to build some more flexibility into Active
> Resource itself.
> 
> I notice that Active Resource hasn''t really changed since 3.0.0.
Is
> anybody working on this right now? Is there a maintainer I should talk
> to regarding potential patches?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Nick
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> 
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

I don''t have a good idea of the pros and cons of turning Active
Resource into a gem, but if that were to happen, it does seem like
Active Resource might become more free to evolve quickly and
independently of the rest of Rails. Perhaps someone who is more
knowledgeable could comment further.

Nick

On May 12, 3:54 pm, Prem Sichanugrist <sikand...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> [Disclaimer: I''m not a core team member]
>
> I think if you would, It''d be great if you''d fork it and
maintain it. I don''t really see much effort to it either, and I
don''t know how to *patch* it since I''m not using it regularly.
>
> I think I''d then try to convince the core team to remove it, and
then suggest people to use that gem instead.
>
> - Prem
>
> On 12 พ.ค. 2554, at 17:49, Nick Urban wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > There are a number of additional features I required for a current
> > project. I was able to solve some of these by using "Reactive
> > Resource" (https://github.com/justinweiss/reactive_resource) but
many
> > I had to implement as override of various sorts. It seems like a
> > better solution would be to build some more flexibility into Active
> > Resource itself.
>
> > I notice that Active Resource hasn''t really changed since
3.0.0. Is
> > anybody working on this right now? Is there a maintainer I should talk
> > to regarding potential patches?
>
> > Thanks,
>
> > Nick
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

ActiveResource has always promised great things, but it''s still
something of a dream.

I''d love to see some progress. Particularly against the context of
things like Paul Dix''s book
http://www.amazon.com/Service-Oriented-Design-Rails-Addison-Wesley-Professional/dp/0321659368

—P

On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Nick Urban <nickurban@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I don''t have a good idea of the pros and cons of turning Active
> Resource into a gem, but if that were to happen, it does seem like
> Active Resource might become more free to evolve quickly and
> independently of the rest of Rails. Perhaps someone who is more
> knowledgeable could comment further.
>
> Nick
>
> On May 12, 3:54 pm, Prem Sichanugrist <sikand...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> [Disclaimer: I''m not a core team member]
>>
>> I think if you would, It''d be great if you''d fork it
and maintain it. I don''t really see much effort to it either, and I
don''t know how to *patch* it since I''m not using it regularly.
>>
>> I think I''d then try to convince the core team to remove it,
and then suggest people to use that gem instead.
>>
>> - Prem
>>
>> On 12 พ.ค. 2554, at 17:49, Nick Urban wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > There are a number of additional features I required for a current
>> > project. I was able to solve some of these by using "Reactive
>> > Resource" (https://github.com/justinweiss/reactive_resource)
but many
>> > I had to implement as override of various sorts. It seems like a
>> > better solution would be to build some more flexibility into
Active
>> > Resource itself.
>>
>> > I notice that Active Resource hasn''t really changed since
3.0.0. Is
>> > anybody working on this right now? Is there a maintainer I should
talk
>> > to regarding potential patches?
>>
>> > Thanks,
>>
>> > Nick
>>
>> > --
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
>> > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
>> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> > For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
>


-- 

Paul Campbell
paul@hypertiny.ie
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
web http://hypertiny.ie
blog http://www.pabcas.com
twitter http://www.twitter.com/paulca
github http://www.github.com/paulca
phone +353 87 914 8162
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

I''m working with ActiveResource at the moment and I do find it a bit
lacking personally. Having to implement the find_by_* methods myself is one of
my prime annoyances at the moment.

Perhaps a group of people could get together and work on fixing up the
annoyances people have with it?
On Friday, 13 May 2011 at 9:14 AM, Paul Campbell wrote:
ActiveResource has always promised great things, but it''s
still
> something of a dream.
> 
> I''d love to see some progress. Particularly against the context of
> things like Paul Dix''s book
>
http://www.amazon.com/Service-Oriented-Design-Rails-Addison-Wesley-Professional/dp/0321659368
> 
> —P
> 
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Nick Urban <nickurban@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > I don''t have a good idea of the pros and cons of turning
Active
> > Resource into a gem, but if that were to happen, it does seem like
> > Active Resource might become more free to evolve quickly and
> > independently of the rest of Rails. Perhaps someone who is more
> > knowledgeable could comment further.
> > 
> > Nick
> > 
> > On May 12, 3:54 pm, Prem Sichanugrist <sikand...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > > [Disclaimer: I''m not a core team member]
> > > 
> > > I think if you would, It''d be great if you''d
fork it and maintain it. I don''t really see much effort to it either,
and I don''t know how to *patch* it since I''m not using it
regularly.
> > > 
> > > I think I''d then try to convince the core team to remove
it, and then suggest people to use that gem instead.
> > > 
> > > - Prem
> > > 
> > > On 12 พ.ค. 2554, at 17:49, Nick Urban wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > There are a number of additional features I required for a
current
> > > > project. I was able to solve some of these by using
"Reactive
> > > > Resource"
(https://github.com/justinweiss/reactive_resource) but many
> > > > I had to implement as override of various sorts. It seems
like a
> > > > better solution would be to build some more flexibility into
Active
> > > > Resource itself.
> > > 
> > > > I notice that Active Resource hasn''t really changed
since 3.0.0. Is
> > > > anybody working on this right now? Is there a maintainer I
should talk
> > > > to regarding potential patches?
> > > 
> > > > Thanks,
> > > 
> > > > Nick
> > > 
> > > > --
> > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> > 
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Paul Campbell
> paul@hypertiny.ie
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> web http://hypertiny.ie
> blog http://www.pabcas.com
> twitter http://www.twitter.com/paulca
> github http://www.github.com/paulca
> phone +353 87 914 8162
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> 
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Ryan BIgg <radarlistener@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I''m working with ActiveResource at the moment and I do find it a
bit lacking
> personally. Having to implement the find_by_* methods myself is one of my
> prime annoyances at the moment.
> Perhaps a group of people could get together and work on fixing up the
> annoyances people have with it?
It''d be nice to get some input from the core team on this, but
I''ve
always seen ActiveResource as the "almost unused" part of rails.
It''s
useful (mostly) when you have another rails app providing the web
service, and that''s not always the case (when you don''t, you
usually
need to add enough glue around that it ends up being easier to use
something else.)

Has the core team thought about splitting ActiveResource out of the
main rails framework, as ActionWebService did a while back?

-foca
> On Friday, 13 May 2011 at 9:14 AM, Paul Campbell wrote:
>
> ActiveResource has always promised great things, but it''s still
> something of a dream.
>
> I''d love to see some progress. Particularly against the context of
> things like Paul Dix''s book
>
http://www.amazon.com/Service-Oriented-Design-Rails-Addison-Wesley-Professional/dp/0321659368
>
> —P
>
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Nick Urban <nickurban@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> I don''t have a good idea of the pros and cons of turning Active
> Resource into a gem, but if that were to happen, it does seem like
> Active Resource might become more free to evolve quickly and
> independently of the rest of Rails. Perhaps someone who is more
> knowledgeable could comment further.
>
> Nick
>
> On May 12, 3:54 pm, Prem Sichanugrist <sikand...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [Disclaimer: I''m not a core team member]
>
> I think if you would, It''d be great if you''d fork it and
maintain it. I
> don''t really see much effort to it either, and I don''t
know how to *patch*
> it since I''m not using it regularly.
>
> I think I''d then try to convince the core team to remove it, and
then
> suggest people to use that gem instead.
>
> - Prem
>
> On 12 พ.ค. 2554, at 17:49, Nick Urban wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> There are a number of additional features I required for a current
> project. I was able to solve some of these by using "Reactive
> Resource" (https://github.com/justinweiss/reactive_resource) but many
> I had to implement as override of various sorts. It seems like a
> better solution would be to build some more flexibility into Active
> Resource itself.
>
> I notice that Active Resource hasn''t really changed since 3.0.0.
Is
> anybody working on this right now? Is there a maintainer I should talk
> to regarding potential patches?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nick
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group
> athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
>
>
> --
>
> Paul Campbell
> paul@hypertiny.ie
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> web http://hypertiny.ie
> blog http://www.pabcas.com
> twitter http://www.twitter.com/paulca
> github http://www.github.com/paulca
> phone +353 87 914 8162
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

FYI: I don''t mention it in Rails 3 in Action because there''s
better alternatives, such as HTTParty (or if you''re desperate, Typhoeus
+ Nokogiri) for connecting to external web services.

tl;dr: ActiveResource is a ghetto. Please fix.
On Friday, 13 May 2011 at 9:36 AM, Nicolás Sanguinetti wrote:
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Ryan BIgg <radarlistener@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > I''m working with ActiveResource at the moment and I do find
it a bit lacking
> > personally. Having to implement the find_by_* methods myself is one of
my
> > prime annoyances at the moment.
> > Perhaps a group of people could get together and work on fixing up the
> > annoyances people have with it?
> 
> It''d be nice to get some input from the core team on this, but
I''ve
> always seen ActiveResource as the "almost unused" part of rails.
It''s
> useful (mostly) when you have another rails app providing the web
> service, and that''s not always the case (when you don''t,
you usually
> need to add enough glue around that it ends up being easier to use
> something else.)
> 
> Has the core team thought about splitting ActiveResource out of the
> main rails framework, as ActionWebService did a while back?
> 
> -foca
> 
> > On Friday, 13 May 2011 at 9:14 AM, Paul Campbell wrote:
> > 
> > ActiveResource has always promised great things, but it''s
still
> > something of a dream.
> > 
> > I''d love to see some progress. Particularly against the
context of
> > things like Paul Dix''s book
> >
http://www.amazon.com/Service-Oriented-Design-Rails-Addison-Wesley-Professional/dp/0321659368
> > 
> > —P
> > 
> > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Nick Urban
<nickurban@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > I don''t have a good idea of the pros and cons of turning
Active
> > Resource into a gem, but if that were to happen, it does seem like
> > Active Resource might become more free to evolve quickly and
> > independently of the rest of Rails. Perhaps someone who is more
> > knowledgeable could comment further.
> > 
> > Nick
> > 
> > On May 12, 3:54 pm, Prem Sichanugrist <sikand...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > 
> > [Disclaimer: I''m not a core team member]
> > 
> > I think if you would, It''d be great if you''d fork it
and maintain it. I
> > don''t really see much effort to it either, and I
don''t know how to *patch*
> > it since I''m not using it regularly.
> > 
> > I think I''d then try to convince the core team to remove it,
and then
> > suggest people to use that gem instead.
> > 
> > - Prem
> > 
> > On 12 พ.ค. 2554, at 17:49, Nick Urban wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > There are a number of additional features I required for a current
> > project. I was able to solve some of these by using "Reactive
> > Resource" (https://github.com/justinweiss/reactive_resource) but
many
> > I had to implement as override of various sorts. It seems like a
> > better solution would be to build some more flexibility into Active
> > Resource itself.
> > 
> > I notice that Active Resource hasn''t really changed since
3.0.0. Is
> > anybody working on this right now? Is there a maintainer I should talk
> > to regarding potential patches?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Nick
> > 
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups
> > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group
> > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> > 
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups
> > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > 
> > Paul Campbell
> > paul@hypertiny.ie
> > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > web http://hypertiny.ie
> > blog http://www.pabcas.com
> > twitter http://www.twitter.com/paulca
> > github http://www.github.com/paulca
> > phone +353 87 914 8162
> > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > 
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups
> > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> > 
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups
> > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> 
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

I don''t understand

On 5月13日, 上午5时49分, Nick Urban <nickur...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> There are a number of additional features I required for a current
> project. I was able to solve some of these by using "Reactive
> Resource" (https://github.com/justinweiss/reactive_resource) but many
> I had to implement as override of various sorts. It seems like a
> better solution would be to build some more flexibility into Active
> Resource itself.
>
> I notice that Active Resource hasn''t really changed since 3.0.0.
Is
> anybody working on this right now? Is there a maintainer I should talk
> to regarding potential patches?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nick
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

Hi,

Just a testimony here, as I stumble upon this thread.
Two years ago, my team and I worked on a complex back-office for a
client : a modular sales and customer management system, dealing with
offers, sales, payment, hotline, archive of communications with the
customer. We did it with Rails and we had about 15 different
applications interconnected with webservices. We had to deal with
shared authentication, intranet accounts, rights management, sending
Objects between applications (but with different attributes, depending
on who is asking). A front-end allowed to search, edit and create a
lot of things, and more than often a hotliner action on the frontend
could trigger 10 applications in the back before getting the final
result. To do this we used ActiveRessource.

Unfortunately we didn''t take the time to give feedbacks to the Rails
community about this project, but here are some bulletpoints :
- we had a very hard time finding solutions to our problems on the
internet. It seems that very, very few people are using
ActiveRessource and Rails to construct complex systems.
- If we let aside all the observations like "You should have used Java
instead" that we received from some externals, I should point out that
ActiveRessource has been pretty disappointing, and we could clearly
see how far it is from the rest of Rails features in term of quality.
We felt that only few people actually use it.
- we had to patch for some issues and we wrote several plug-ins to
help us communicate between apps. We had to code it quick and we now
that the quality level of our coding was not enough to submit these
things to the Rails community. In a sense we lacked confidence. But
the thing is : ActiveRessource is far from being enough to do serious
work with several Rails apps, it''s still experimental in my opinion.
And since my project two years ago, it has not evolved a lot.

I think that it would be a good move to make it an external gem, and
if a core-team member or a serious Rails committer takes the lead, I''m
ready to help and to rework on some patches we did.

Pierre

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

Please do submit these patches to the Rails project itself. It doesn''t
matter if you think are poorly written. They will be reviewed and you will get
feedback on them, learning how to write better code and understand the Rails
code as you do it.

You''re not learning if you''re not doing. 
On Friday, 13 May 2011 at 6:42 PM, Pierre Lancien wrote:
Hi,
> 
> Just a testimony here, as I stumble upon this thread.
> Two years ago, my team and I worked on a complex back-office for a
> client : a modular sales and customer management system, dealing with
> offers, sales, payment, hotline, archive of communications with the
> customer. We did it with Rails and we had about 15 different
> applications interconnected with webservices. We had to deal with
> shared authentication, intranet accounts, rights management, sending
> Objects between applications (but with different attributes, depending
> on who is asking). A front-end allowed to search, edit and create a
> lot of things, and more than often a hotliner action on the frontend
> could trigger 10 applications in the back before getting the final
> result. To do this we used ActiveRessource.
> 
> Unfortunately we didn''t take the time to give feedbacks to the
Rails
> community about this project, but here are some bulletpoints :
> - we had a very hard time finding solutions to our problems on the
> internet. It seems that very, very few people are using
> ActiveRessource and Rails to construct complex systems.
> - If we let aside all the observations like "You should have used Java
> instead" that we received from some externals, I should point out that
> ActiveRessource has been pretty disappointing, and we could clearly
> see how far it is from the rest of Rails features in term of quality.
> We felt that only few people actually use it.
> - we had to patch for some issues and we wrote several plug-ins to
> help us communicate between apps. We had to code it quick and we now
> that the quality level of our coding was not enough to submit these
> things to the Rails community. In a sense we lacked confidence. But
> the thing is : ActiveRessource is far from being enough to do serious
> work with several Rails apps, it''s still experimental in my
opinion.
> And since my project two years ago, it has not evolved a lot.
> 
> I think that it would be a good move to make it an external gem, and
> if a core-team member or a serious Rails committer takes the lead,
I''m
> ready to help and to rework on some patches we did.
> 
> Pierre
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> 
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

My $0.02...

+1 for splitting ActiveResource into a gem that is outside of the
core.

As Ryan Bigg says below, there are better alternatives and removing it
from the core wouldn''t force those that are using something else to
have it laying around.  It would also allow it to be versioned
independently as it seems to have a lifecycle of its'' own.


On May 12, 7:36 pm, Nicolás Sanguinetti <h...@nicolassanguinetti.info>
wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Ryan BIgg <radarliste...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > I''m working with ActiveResource at the moment and I do find
it a bit lacking
> > personally. Having to implement the find_by_* methods myself is one of
my
> > prime annoyances at the moment.
> > Perhaps a group of people could get together and work on fixing up the
> > annoyances people have with it?
>
> It''d be nice to get some input from the core team on this, but
I''ve
> always seen ActiveResource as the "almost unused" part of rails.
It''s
> useful (mostly) when you have another rails app providing the web
> service, and that''s not always the case (when you don''t,
you usually
> need to add enough glue around that it ends up being easier to use
> something else.)
>
> Has the core team thought about splitting ActiveResource out of the
> main rails framework, as ActionWebService did a while back?
>
> -foca
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Friday, 13 May 2011 at 9:14 AM, Paul Campbell wrote:
>
> > ActiveResource has always promised great things, but it''s
still
> > something of a dream.
>
> > I''d love to see some progress. Particularly against the
context of
> > things like Paul Dix''s book
>
>http://www.amazon.com/Service-Oriented-Design-Rails-Addison-Wesley-Pr...
>
> > —P
>
> > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Nick Urban
<nickur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I don''t have a good idea of the pros and cons of turning
Active
> > Resource into a gem, but if that were to happen, it does seem like
> > Active Resource might become more free to evolve quickly and
> > independently of the rest of Rails. Perhaps someone who is more
> > knowledgeable could comment further.
>
> > Nick
>
> > On May 12, 3:54 pm, Prem Sichanugrist <sikand...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> > [Disclaimer: I''m not a core team member]
>
> > I think if you would, It''d be great if you''d fork it
and maintain it. I
> > don''t really see much effort to it either, and I
don''t know how to *patch*
> > it since I''m not using it regularly.
>
> > I think I''d then try to convince the core team to remove it,
and then
> > suggest people to use that gem instead.
>
> > - Prem
>
> > On 12 พ.ค. 2554, at 17:49, Nick Urban wrote:
>
> > There are a number of additional features I required for a current
> > project. I was able to solve some of these by using "Reactive
> > Resource" (https://github.com/justinweiss/reactive_resource) but
many
> > I had to implement as override of various sorts. It seems like a
> > better solution would be to build some more flexibility into Active
> > Resource itself.
>
> > I notice that Active Resource hasn''t really changed since
3.0.0. Is
> > anybody working on this right now? Is there a maintainer I should talk
> > to regarding potential patches?
>
> > Thanks,
>
> > Nick
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups
> > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group
> > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups
> > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > --
>
> > Paul Campbell
> > p...@hypertiny.ie
> > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > webhttp://hypertiny.ie
> > bloghttp://www.pabcas.com
> > twitterhttp://www.twitter.com/paulca
> > githubhttp://www.github.com/paulca
> > phone +353 87 914 8162
> > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups
> > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups
> > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

I totally agree, ActiveResource needs to be resurrected either within or out of
the framework as independent project.

There is even a very interesting pull request (to add initial support for
associations) waiting for review:

https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/230

-- 
Guillermo Iguaran
On Thursday, May 12, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Nicolás Sanguinetti wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Ryan BIgg <radarlistener@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > I''m working with ActiveResource at the moment and I do find
it a bit lacking
> > personally. Having to implement the find_by_* methods myself is one of
my
> > prime annoyances at the moment.
> > Perhaps a group of people could get together and work on fixing up the
> > annoyances people have with it?
> 
> It''d be nice to get some input from the core team on this, but
I''ve
> always seen ActiveResource as the "almost unused" part of rails.
It''s
> useful (mostly) when you have another rails app providing the web
> service, and that''s not always the case (when you don''t,
you usually
> need to add enough glue around that it ends up being easier to use
> something else.)
> 
> Has the core team thought about splitting ActiveResource out of the
> main rails framework, as ActionWebService did a while back?
> 
> -foca
> 
> > On Friday, 13 May 2011 at 9:14 AM, Paul Campbell wrote:
> > 
> > ActiveResource has always promised great things, but it''s
still
> > something of a dream.
> > 
> > I''d love to see some progress. Particularly against the
context of
> > things like Paul Dix''s book
> >
http://www.amazon.com/Service-Oriented-Design-Rails-Addison-Wesley-Professional/dp/0321659368
> > 
> > —P
> > 
> > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Nick Urban
<nickurban@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > I don''t have a good idea of the pros and cons of turning
Active
> > Resource into a gem, but if that were to happen, it does seem like
> > Active Resource might become more free to evolve quickly and
> > independently of the rest of Rails. Perhaps someone who is more
> > knowledgeable could comment further.
> > 
> > Nick
> > 
> > On May 12, 3:54 pm, Prem Sichanugrist <sikand...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > 
> > [Disclaimer: I''m not a core team member]
> > 
> > I think if you would, It''d be great if you''d fork it
and maintain it. I
> > don''t really see much effort to it either, and I
don''t know how to *patch*
> > it since I''m not using it regularly.
> > 
> > I think I''d then try to convince the core team to remove it,
and then
> > suggest people to use that gem instead.
> > 
> > - Prem
> > 
> > On 12 พ.ค. 2554, at 17:49, Nick Urban wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > There are a number of additional features I required for a current
> > project. I was able to solve some of these by using "Reactive
> > Resource" (https://github.com/justinweiss/reactive_resource) but
many
> > I had to implement as override of various sorts. It seems like a
> > better solution would be to build some more flexibility into Active
> > Resource itself.
> > 
> > I notice that Active Resource hasn''t really changed since
3.0.0. Is
> > anybody working on this right now? Is there a maintainer I should talk
> > to regarding potential patches?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Nick
> > 
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups
> > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group
> > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> > 
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups
> > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > 
> > Paul Campbell
> > paul@hypertiny.ie
> > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > web http://hypertiny.ie
> > blog http://www.pabcas.com
> > twitter http://www.twitter.com/paulca
> > github http://www.github.com/paulca
> > phone +353 87 914 8162
> > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > 
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups
> > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> > 
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups
> > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> 
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

So this brings me back to my initial question: who is in charge of
this right now? If we wanted to make a gem, as everyone seems to be
suggesting, how would the transition happen?

On May 13, 7:49 pm, Guillermo Iguaran <guilleigua...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I totally agree, ActiveResource needs to be resurrected either within or
out of the framework as independent project.
>
> There is even a very interesting pull request (to add initial support for
associations) waiting for review:
>
> https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/230
>
> --
> Guillermo Iguaran
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thursday, May 12, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Nicolás Sanguinetti wrote:
> > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Ryan BIgg
<radarliste...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I''m working with ActiveResource at the moment and I do
find it a bit lacking
> > > personally. Having to implement the find_by_* methods myself is
one of my
> > > prime annoyances at the moment.
> > > Perhaps a group of people could get together and work on fixing
up the
> > > annoyances people have with it?
>
> > It''d be nice to get some input from the core team on this,
but I''ve
> > always seen ActiveResource as the "almost unused" part of
rails. It''s
> > useful (mostly) when you have another rails app providing the web
> > service, and that''s not always the case (when you
don''t, you usually
> > need to add enough glue around that it ends up being easier to use
> > something else.)
>
> > Has the core team thought about splitting ActiveResource out of the
> > main rails framework, as ActionWebService did a while back?
>
> > -foca
>
> > > On Friday, 13 May 2011 at 9:14 AM, Paul Campbell wrote:
>
> > > ActiveResource has always promised great things, but
it''s still
> > > something of a dream.
>
> > > I''d love to see some progress. Particularly against the
context of
> > > things like Paul Dix''s book
> >
>http://www.amazon.com/Service-Oriented-Design-Rails-Addison-Wesley-Pr...
>
> > > —P
>
> > > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Nick Urban
<nickur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > I don''t have a good idea of the pros and cons of turning
Active
> > > Resource into a gem, but if that were to happen, it does seem
like
> > > Active Resource might become more free to evolve quickly and
> > > independently of the rest of Rails. Perhaps someone who is more
> > > knowledgeable could comment further.
>
> > > Nick
>
> > > On May 12, 3:54 pm, Prem Sichanugrist <sikand...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> > > [Disclaimer: I''m not a core team member]
>
> > > I think if you would, It''d be great if you''d
fork it and maintain it. I
> > > don''t really see much effort to it either, and I
don''t know how to *patch*
> > > it since I''m not using it regularly.
>
> > > I think I''d then try to convince the core team to remove
it, and then
> > > suggest people to use that gem instead.
>
> > > - Prem
>
> > > On 12 พ.ค. 2554, at 17:49, Nick Urban wrote:
>
> > > There are a number of additional features I required for a
current
> > > project. I was able to solve some of these by using
"Reactive
> > > Resource" (https://github.com/justinweiss/reactive_resource)
but many
> > > I had to implement as override of various sorts. It seems like a
> > > better solution would be to build some more flexibility into
Active
> > > Resource itself.
>
> > > I notice that Active Resource hasn''t really changed
since 3.0.0. Is
> > > anybody working on this right now? Is there a maintainer I should
talk
> > > to regarding potential patches?
>
> > > Thanks,
>
> > > Nick
>
> > > --
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups
> > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > For more options, visit this group
> > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > --
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups
> > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > For more options, visit this group at
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > --
>
> > > Paul Campbell
> > > p...@hypertiny.ie
> > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > > webhttp://hypertiny.ie
> > > bloghttp://www.pabcas.com
> > > twitterhttp://www.twitter.com/paulca
> > > githubhttp://www.github.com/paulca
> > > phone +353 87 914 8162
> > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> > > --
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups
> > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > For more options, visit this group at
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > --
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups
> > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > For more options, visit this group at
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

I''ve extracted it to another project and remove it from the Rails
source yesterday. I sent the pull request and got closed right away.

So it seems like someone has to maintain it.

On May 16, 2011, at 11:12 AM, Nick Urban wrote:
> So this brings me back to my initial question: who is in charge of
> this right now? If we wanted to make a gem, as everyone seems to be
> suggesting, how would the transition happen?
> 
> On May 13, 7:49 pm, Guillermo Iguaran <guilleigua...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>> I totally agree, ActiveResource needs to be resurrected either within
or out of the framework as independent project.
>> 
>> There is even a very interesting pull request (to add initial support
for associations) waiting for review:
>> 
>> https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/230
>> 
>> --
>> Guillermo Iguaran
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Thursday, May 12, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Nicolás Sanguinetti wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Ryan BIgg
<radarliste...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I''m working with ActiveResource at the moment and I do
find it a bit lacking
>>>> personally. Having to implement the find_by_* methods myself is
one of my
>>>> prime annoyances at the moment.
>>>> Perhaps a group of people could get together and work on fixing
up the
>>>> annoyances people have with it?
>> 
>>> It''d be nice to get some input from the core team on this,
but I''ve
>>> always seen ActiveResource as the "almost unused" part of
rails. It''s
>>> useful (mostly) when you have another rails app providing the web
>>> service, and that''s not always the case (when you
don''t, you usually
>>> need to add enough glue around that it ends up being easier to use
>>> something else.)
>> 
>>> Has the core team thought about splitting ActiveResource out of the
>>> main rails framework, as ActionWebService did a while back?
>> 
>>> -foca
>> 
>>>> On Friday, 13 May 2011 at 9:14 AM, Paul Campbell wrote:
>> 
>>>> ActiveResource has always promised great things, but
it''s still
>>>> something of a dream.
>> 
>>>> I''d love to see some progress. Particularly against
the context of
>>>> things like Paul Dix''s book
>>>>
http://www.amazon.com/Service-Oriented-Design-Rails-Addison-Wesley-Pr...
>> 
>>>> —P
>> 
>>>> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Nick Urban
<nickur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>> I don''t have a good idea of the pros and cons of
turning Active
>>>> Resource into a gem, but if that were to happen, it does seem
like
>>>> Active Resource might become more free to evolve quickly and
>>>> independently of the rest of Rails. Perhaps someone who is more
>>>> knowledgeable could comment further.
>> 
>>>> Nick
>> 
>>>> On May 12, 3:54 pm, Prem Sichanugrist
<sikand...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>> [Disclaimer: I''m not a core team member]
>> 
>>>> I think if you would, It''d be great if you''d
fork it and maintain it. I
>>>> don''t really see much effort to it either, and I
don''t know how to *patch*
>>>> it since I''m not using it regularly.
>> 
>>>> I think I''d then try to convince the core team to
remove it, and then
>>>> suggest people to use that gem instead.
>> 
>>>> - Prem
>> 
>>>> On 12 พ.ค. 2554, at 17:49, Nick Urban wrote:
>> 
>>>> There are a number of additional features I required for a
current
>>>> project. I was able to solve some of these by using
"Reactive
>>>> Resource"
(https://github.com/justinweiss/reactive_resource) but many
>>>> I had to implement as override of various sorts. It seems like
a
>>>> better solution would be to build some more flexibility into
Active
>>>> Resource itself.
>> 
>>>> I notice that Active Resource hasn''t really changed
since 3.0.0. Is
>>>> anybody working on this right now? Is there a maintainer I
should talk
>>>> to regarding potential patches?
>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>> 
>>>> Nick
>> 
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups
>>>> "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
>>>> To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>> rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>>> For more options, visit this group
>>>> athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>> 
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups
>>>> "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
>>>> To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>> rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>> 
>>>> --
>> 
>>>> Paul Campbell
>>>> p...@hypertiny.ie
>>>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>>> webhttp://hypertiny.ie
>>>> bloghttp://www.pabcas.com
>>>> twitterhttp://www.twitter.com/paulca
>>>> githubhttp://www.github.com/paulca
>>>> phone +353 87 914 8162
>>>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>> 
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups
>>>> "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
>>>> To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>> rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>> 
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups
>>>> "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
>>>> To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>> rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>> 
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> 
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

I''ll offer to maintain it, I''ve been looking for a chance to
get involved with Rails in a better way. I''m a student stuck in the
middle of exams right now, but am starting a job heading up the dev team on a
Ruby/Rails project in a couple of months so will be involved heavily then. I
know the guys behind the new company really want to be contributing to open
source, and I certainly do, so they will be resources backed to helping maintain
it.

How does this kind of thing usually work? Does it involve some kind of
interview, or is it just a "first come, first serve" take it or leave
it basis?

Jamie

---------------
Jamie Rumbelow
Writer, Speaker, Geek
jamie@jamierumbelow.net | http://jamieonsoftware.com
+44 (0)7956 363875

On Monday, 16 May 2011 at 16:14, Prem Sichanugrist wrote:
> I''ve extracted it to another project and remove it from the Rails
source yesterday. I sent the pull request and got closed right away.
> 
> So it seems like someone has to maintain it.
> 
> On May 16, 2011, at 11:12 AM, Nick Urban wrote:
> 
> > So this brings me back to my initial question: who is in charge of
> > this right now? If we wanted to make a gem, as everyone seems to be
> > suggesting, how would the transition happen?
> > 
> > On May 13, 7:49 pm, Guillermo Iguaran <guilleigua...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > > I totally agree, ActiveResource needs to be resurrected either
within or out of the framework as independent project.
> > > 
> > > There is even a very interesting pull request (to add initial
support for associations) waiting for review:
> > > 
> > > https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/230
> > > 
> > > --
> > > Guillermo Iguaran
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Thursday, May 12, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Nicolás Sanguinetti wrote:
> > > > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Ryan BIgg
<radarliste...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > I''m working with ActiveResource at the moment
and I do find it a bit lacking
> > > > > personally. Having to implement the find_by_* methods
myself is one of my
> > > > > prime annoyances at the moment.
> > > > > Perhaps a group of people could get together and work
on fixing up the
> > > > > annoyances people have with it?
> > > 
> > > > It''d be nice to get some input from the core team
on this, but I''ve
> > > > always seen ActiveResource as the "almost unused"
part of rails. It''s
> > > > useful (mostly) when you have another rails app providing
the web
> > > > service, and that''s not always the case (when you
don''t, you usually
> > > > need to add enough glue around that it ends up being easier
to use
> > > > something else.)
> > > 
> > > > Has the core team thought about splitting ActiveResource out
of the
> > > > main rails framework, as ActionWebService did a while back?
> > > 
> > > > -foca
> > > 
> > > > > On Friday, 13 May 2011 at 9:14 AM, Paul Campbell wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > ActiveResource has always promised great things, but
it''s still
> > > > > something of a dream.
> > > 
> > > > > I''d love to see some progress. Particularly
against the context of
> > > > > things like Paul Dix''s book
> > > > >
http://www.amazon.com/Service-Oriented-Design-Rails-Addison-Wesley-Pr...
> > > 
> > > > > —P
> > > 
> > > > > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Nick Urban
<nickur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > I don''t have a good idea of the pros and cons
of turning Active
> > > > > Resource into a gem, but if that were to happen, it
does seem like
> > > > > Active Resource might become more free to evolve
quickly and
> > > > > independently of the rest of Rails. Perhaps someone who
is more
> > > > > knowledgeable could comment further.
> > > 
> > > > > Nick
> > > 
> > > > > On May 12, 3:54 pm, Prem Sichanugrist
<sikand...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > [Disclaimer: I''m not a core team member]
> > > 
> > > > > I think if you would, It''d be great if
you''d fork it and maintain it. I
> > > > > don''t really see much effort to it either, and
I don''t know how to *patch*
> > > > > it since I''m not using it regularly.
> > > 
> > > > > I think I''d then try to convince the core team
to remove it, and then
> > > > > suggest people to use that gem instead.
> > > 
> > > > > - Prem
> > > 
> > > > > On 12 พ.ค. 2554, at 17:49, Nick Urban wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > There are a number of additional features I required
for a current
> > > > > project. I was able to solve some of these by using
"Reactive
> > > > > Resource"
(https://github.com/justinweiss/reactive_resource) but many
> > > > > I had to implement as override of various sorts. It
seems like a
> > > > > better solution would be to build some more flexibility
into Active
> > > > > Resource itself.
> > > 
> > > > > I notice that Active Resource hasn''t really
changed since 3.0.0. Is
> > > > > anybody working on this right now? Is there a
maintainer I should talk
> > > > > to regarding potential patches?
> > > 
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > 
> > > > > Nick
> > > 
> > > > > --
> > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to
the Google Groups
> > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > For more options, visit this group
> > > > >
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> > > 
> > > > > --
> > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to
the Google Groups
> > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> > > 
> > > > > --
> > > 
> > > > > Paul Campbell
> > > > > p...@hypertiny.ie
> > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > > > > webhttp://hypertiny.ie
> > > > > bloghttp://www.pabcas.com
> > > > > twitterhttp://www.twitter.com/paulca
> > > > > githubhttp://www.github.com/paulca
> > > > > phone +353 87 914 8162
> > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > > 
> > > > > --
> > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to
the Google Groups
> > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> > > 
> > > > > --
> > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to
the Google Groups
> > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> > > 
> > > > --
> > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> > 
> > -- 
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> 
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

Jason Stirk and I are working on a rewrite of Active Resource at Railsconf.
We''re looking for help too, so if you''re here come catch up
with us and we''ll talk.
On Monday, 16 May 2011 at 11:14 AM, Prem Sichanugrist wrote:
I''ve extracted it to another project and remove it from the Rails
source yesterday. I sent the pull request and got closed right
away.
> 
> So it seems like someone has to maintain it.
> 
> On May 16, 2011, at 11:12 AM, Nick Urban wrote:
> 
> > So this brings me back to my initial question: who is in charge of
> > this right now? If we wanted to make a gem, as everyone seems to be
> > suggesting, how would the transition happen?
> > 
> > On May 13, 7:49 pm, Guillermo Iguaran <guilleigua...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > > I totally agree, ActiveResource needs to be resurrected either
within or out of the framework as independent project.
> > > 
> > > There is even a very interesting pull request (to add initial
support for associations) waiting for review:
> > > 
> > > https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/230
> > > 
> > > --
> > > Guillermo Iguaran
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Thursday, May 12, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Nicolás Sanguinetti wrote:
> > > > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Ryan BIgg
<radarliste...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > I''m working with ActiveResource at the moment
and I do find it a bit lacking
> > > > > personally. Having to implement the find_by_* methods
myself is one of my
> > > > > prime annoyances at the moment.
> > > > > Perhaps a group of people could get together and work
on fixing up the
> > > > > annoyances people have with it?
> > > 
> > > > It''d be nice to get some input from the core team
on this, but I''ve
> > > > always seen ActiveResource as the "almost unused"
part of rails. It''s
> > > > useful (mostly) when you have another rails app providing
the web
> > > > service, and that''s not always the case (when you
don''t, you usually
> > > > need to add enough glue around that it ends up being easier
to use
> > > > something else.)
> > > 
> > > > Has the core team thought about splitting ActiveResource out
of the
> > > > main rails framework, as ActionWebService did a while back?
> > > 
> > > > -foca
> > > 
> > > > > On Friday, 13 May 2011 at 9:14 AM, Paul Campbell wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > ActiveResource has always promised great things, but
it''s still
> > > > > something of a dream.
> > > 
> > > > > I''d love to see some progress. Particularly
against the context of
> > > > > things like Paul Dix''s book
> > > > >
http://www.amazon.com/Service-Oriented-Design-Rails-Addison-Wesley-Pr...
> > > 
> > > > > —P
> > > 
> > > > > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Nick Urban
<nickur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > I don''t have a good idea of the pros and cons
of turning Active
> > > > > Resource into a gem, but if that were to happen, it
does seem like
> > > > > Active Resource might become more free to evolve
quickly and
> > > > > independently of the rest of Rails. Perhaps someone who
is more
> > > > > knowledgeable could comment further.
> > > 
> > > > > Nick
> > > 
> > > > > On May 12, 3:54 pm, Prem Sichanugrist
<sikand...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > [Disclaimer: I''m not a core team member]
> > > 
> > > > > I think if you would, It''d be great if
you''d fork it and maintain it. I
> > > > > don''t really see much effort to it either, and
I don''t know how to *patch*
> > > > > it since I''m not using it regularly.
> > > 
> > > > > I think I''d then try to convince the core team
to remove it, and then
> > > > > suggest people to use that gem instead.
> > > 
> > > > > - Prem
> > > 
> > > > > On 12 พ.ค. 2554, at 17:49, Nick Urban wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > There are a number of additional features I required
for a current
> > > > > project. I was able to solve some of these by using
"Reactive
> > > > > Resource"
(https://github.com/justinweiss/reactive_resource) but many
> > > > > I had to implement as override of various sorts. It
seems like a
> > > > > better solution would be to build some more flexibility
into Active
> > > > > Resource itself.
> > > 
> > > > > I notice that Active Resource hasn''t really
changed since 3.0.0. Is
> > > > > anybody working on this right now? Is there a
maintainer I should talk
> > > > > to regarding potential patches?
> > > 
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > 
> > > > > Nick
> > > 
> > > > > --
> > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to
the Google Groups
> > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > For more options, visit this group
> > > > >
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> > > 
> > > > > --
> > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to
the Google Groups
> > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> > > 
> > > > > --
> > > 
> > > > > Paul Campbell
> > > > > p...@hypertiny.ie
> > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > > > > webhttp://hypertiny.ie
> > > > > bloghttp://www.pabcas.com
> > > > > twitterhttp://www.twitter.com/paulca
> > > > > githubhttp://www.github.com/paulca
> > > > > phone +353 87 914 8162
> > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > > 
> > > > > --
> > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to
the Google Groups
> > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> > > 
> > > > > --
> > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to
the Google Groups
> > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> > > 
> > > > --
> > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> > 
> > -- 
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> 
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

I created a google group for Active Resource.

Please join if you''re interested in contributing. I always set big
groups on digest or no-email and miss most of the discussion, but I
want to receive actual messages about Active Resource development. By
having a high signal-to-noise list, hopefully we can keep the
conversation focused and build some momentum.

http://groups.google.com/group/active-resource

Thanks,

Nick

On May 16, 9:19 am, Ryan Bigg <radarliste...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Jason Stirk and I are working on a rewrite of Active Resource at Railsconf.
We''re looking for help too, so if you''re here come catch up
with us and we''ll talk.On Monday, 16 May 2011 at 11:14 AM, Prem
Sichanugrist wrote:
>
> I''ve extracted it to another project and remove it from the Rails
source yesterday. I sent the pull request and got closed right away.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > So it seems like someone has to maintain it.
>
> > On May 16, 2011, at 11:12 AM, Nick Urban wrote:
>
> > > So this brings me back to my initial question: who is in charge
of
> > > this right now? If we wanted to make a gem, as everyone seems to
be
> > > suggesting, how would the transition happen?
>
> > > On May 13, 7:49 pm, Guillermo Iguaran
<guilleigua...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I totally agree, ActiveResource needs to be resurrected
either within or out of the framework as independent project.
>
> > > > There is even a very interesting pull request (to add
initial support for associations) waiting for review:
>
> > > >https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/230
>
> > > > --
> > > > Guillermo Iguaran
>
> > > > On Thursday, May 12, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Nicolás Sanguinetti
wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Ryan BIgg
<radarliste...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > I''m working with ActiveResource at the
moment and I do find it a bit lacking
> > > > > > personally. Having to implement the find_by_*
methods myself is one of my
> > > > > > prime annoyances at the moment.
> > > > > > Perhaps a group of people could get together and
work on fixing up the
> > > > > > annoyances people have with it?
>
> > > > > It''d be nice to get some input from the core
team on this, but I''ve
> > > > > always seen ActiveResource as the "almost
unused" part of rails. It''s
> > > > > useful (mostly) when you have another rails app
providing the web
> > > > > service, and that''s not always the case (when
you don''t, you usually
> > > > > need to add enough glue around that it ends up being
easier to use
> > > > > something else.)
>
> > > > > Has the core team thought about splitting
ActiveResource out of the
> > > > > main rails framework, as ActionWebService did a while
back?
>
> > > > > -foca
>
> > > > > > On Friday, 13 May 2011 at 9:14 AM, Paul Campbell
wrote:
>
> > > > > > ActiveResource has always promised great things,
but it''s still
> > > > > > something of a dream.
>
> > > > > > I''d love to see some progress.
Particularly against the context of
> > > > > > things like Paul Dix''s book
> > > > >
>http://www.amazon.com/Service-Oriented-Design-Rails-Addison-Wesley-Pr...
>
> > > > > > —P
>
> > > > > > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Nick Urban
<nickur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > I don''t have a good idea of the pros and
cons of turning Active
> > > > > > Resource into a gem, but if that were to happen,
it does seem like
> > > > > > Active Resource might become more free to evolve
quickly and
> > > > > > independently of the rest of Rails. Perhaps
someone who is more
> > > > > > knowledgeable could comment further.
>
> > > > > > Nick
>
> > > > > > On May 12, 3:54 pm, Prem Sichanugrist
<sikand...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > [Disclaimer: I''m not a core team member]
>
> > > > > > I think if you would, It''d be great if
you''d fork it and maintain it. I
> > > > > > don''t really see much effort to it
either, and I don''t know how to *patch*
> > > > > > it since I''m not using it regularly.
>
> > > > > > I think I''d then try to convince the core
team to remove it, and then
> > > > > > suggest people to use that gem instead.
>
> > > > > > - Prem
>
> > > > > > On 12 พ.ค. 2554, at 17:49, Nick Urban wrote:
>
> > > > > > There are a number of additional features I
required for a current
> > > > > > project. I was able to solve some of these by
using "Reactive
> > > > > > Resource"
(https://github.com/justinweiss/reactive_resource) but many
> > > > > > I had to implement as override of various sorts.
It seems like a
> > > > > > better solution would be to build some more
flexibility into Active
> > > > > > Resource itself.
>
> > > > > > I notice that Active Resource hasn''t
really changed since 3.0.0. Is
> > > > > > anybody working on this right now? Is there a
maintainer I should talk
> > > > > > to regarding potential patches?
>
> > > > > > Thanks,
>
> > > > > > Nick
>
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > For more options, visit this group
> > > > > >
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > >
>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > > > > --
>
> > > > > > Paul Campbell
> > > > > > p...@hypertiny.ie
> > > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > > > > > webhttp://hypertiny.ie
> > > > > > bloghttp://www.pabcas.com
> > > > > > twitterhttp://www.twitter.com/paulca
> > > > > > githubhttp://www.github.com/paulca
> > > > > > phone +353 87 914 8162
> > > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > >
>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > >
>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to
the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > --
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

It''s more like a "get your pull request in, we''ll review
it thing. Go ahead
and send us pull request ;)

Sent from my iPad

On 16 พ.ค. 2554, at 12:41, Jamie Rumbelow <jamie@jamierumbelow.net> wrote:

 I''ll offer to maintain it, I''ve been looking for a chance to
get involved
with Rails in a better way. I''m a student stuck in the middle of exams
right
now, but am starting a job heading up the dev team on a Ruby/Rails project
in a couple of months so will be involved heavily then. I know the guys
behind the new company really want to be contributing to open source, and I
certainly do, so they will be resources backed to helping maintain it.

How does this kind of thing usually work? Does it involve some kind of
interview, or is it just a "first come, first serve" take it or leave
it
basis?

Jamie

---------------
Jamie Rumbelow
Writer, Speaker, Geek
jamie@jamierumbelow.net | http://jamieonsoftware.com
+44 (0)7956 363875

On Monday, 16 May 2011 at 16:14, Prem Sichanugrist wrote:

I''ve extracted it to another project and remove it from the Rails
source
yesterday. I sent the pull request and got closed right away.

So it seems like someone has to maintain it.

On May 16, 2011, at 11:12 AM, Nick Urban wrote:

So this brings me back to my initial question: who is in charge of
this right now? If we wanted to make a gem, as everyone seems to be
suggesting, how would the transition happen?

On May 13, 7:49 pm, Guillermo Iguaran <guilleigua...@gmail.com> wrote:

I totally agree, ActiveResource needs to be resurrected either within or out
of the framework as independent project.

There is even a very interesting pull request (to add initial support for
associations) waiting for review:

https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/230

--
Guillermo Iguaran







On Thursday, May 12, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Nicolás Sanguinetti wrote:

On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Ryan BIgg <radarliste...@gmail.com>
wrote:

I''m working with ActiveResource at the moment and I do find it a bit
lacking
personally. Having to implement the find_by_* methods myself is one of my
prime annoyances at the moment.
Perhaps a group of people could get together and work on fixing up the
annoyances people have with it?


It''d be nice to get some input from the core team on this, but
I''ve
always seen ActiveResource as the "almost unused" part of rails.
It''s
useful (mostly) when you have another rails app providing the web
service, and that''s not always the case (when you don''t, you
usually
need to add enough glue around that it ends up being easier to use
something else.)


Has the core team thought about splitting ActiveResource out of the
main rails framework, as ActionWebService did a while back?


-foca


On Friday, 13 May 2011 at 9:14 AM, Paul Campbell wrote:


ActiveResource has always promised great things, but it''s still
something of a dream.


I''d love to see some progress. Particularly against the context of
things like Paul Dix''s book
http://www.amazon.com/Service-Oriented-Design-Rails-Addison-Wesley-Pr...


—P


On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Nick Urban <nickur...@gmail.com> wrote:


I don''t have a good idea of the pros and cons of turning Active
Resource into a gem, but if that were to happen, it does seem like
Active Resource might become more free to evolve quickly and
independently of the rest of Rails. Perhaps someone who is more
knowledgeable could comment further.


Nick


On May 12, 3:54 pm, Prem Sichanugrist <sikand...@gmail.com> wrote:


[Disclaimer: I''m not a core team member]


I think if you would, It''d be great if you''d fork it and
maintain it. I
don''t really see much effort to it either, and I don''t know
how to *patch*
it since I''m not using it regularly.


I think I''d then try to convince the core team to remove it, and then
suggest people to use that gem instead.


- Prem


On 12 พ.ค. 2554, at 17:49, Nick Urban wrote:


There are a number of additional features I required for a current
project. I was able to solve some of these by using "Reactive
Resource" (https://github.com/justinweiss/reactive_resource) but many
I had to implement as override of various sorts. It seems like a
better solution would be to build some more flexibility into Active
Resource itself.


I notice that Active Resource hasn''t really changed since 3.0.0. Is
anybody working on this right now? Is there a maintainer I should talk
to regarding potential patches?


Thanks,


Nick


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.


--


Paul Campbell
p...@hypertiny.ie
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
webhttp://hypertiny.ie
bloghttp://www.pabcas.com
twitterhttp://www.twitter.com/paulca
githubhttp://www.github.com/paulca
phone +353 87 914 8162
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group athttp://
groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.


  --
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

Hello guys,

I''m working (with a friend of mine) on improving ActiveResource.
Currently, we work at this pull request and we''re adding a belongs_to
method for finishing it:

https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/230

I would love to see that ActiveResource stay in Rails core and get
more attention by it''s maintainers because it has a lot of potential
to become a really usefull piece of software,
but even if it get moved into a new gem we will continue developing on
it.

What do you guys think about it?

Greetz
Markus


On 16 Mai, 17:18, Jamie Rumbelow <ja...@jamierumbelow.net>
wrote:
> I''ll offer to maintain it, I''ve been looking for a chance
to get involved with Rails in a better way. I''m a student stuck in the
middle of exams right now, but am starting a job heading up the dev team on a
Ruby/Rails project in a couple of months so will be involved heavily then. I
know the guys behind the new company really want to be contributing to open
source, and I certainly do, so they will be resources backed to helping maintain
it.
>
> How does this kind of thing usually work? Does it involve some kind of
interview, or is it just a "first come, first serve" take it or leave
it basis?
>
> Jamie
>
> ---------------
> Jamie Rumbelow
> Writer, Speaker, Geek
> ja...@jamierumbelow.net |http://jamieonsoftware.com
> +44 (0)7956 363875
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Monday, 16 May 2011 at 16:14, Prem Sichanugrist wrote:
> > I''ve extracted it to another project and remove it from the
Rails source yesterday. I sent the pull request and got closed right away.
>
> > So it seems like someone has to maintain it.
>
> > On May 16, 2011, at 11:12 AM, Nick Urban wrote:
>
> > > So this brings me back to my initial question: who is in charge
of
> > > this right now? If we wanted to make a gem, as everyone seems to
be
> > > suggesting, how would the transition happen?
>
> > > On May 13, 7:49 pm, Guillermo Iguaran
<guilleigua...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I totally agree, ActiveResource needs to be resurrected
either within or out of the framework as independent project.
>
> > > > There is even a very interesting pull request (to add
initial support for associations) waiting for review:
>
> > > >https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/230
>
> > > > --
> > > > Guillermo Iguaran
>
> > > > On Thursday, May 12, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Nicolás Sanguinetti
wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Ryan BIgg
<radarliste...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > I''m working with ActiveResource at the
moment and I do find it a bit lacking
> > > > > > personally. Having to implement the find_by_*
methods myself is one of my
> > > > > > prime annoyances at the moment.
> > > > > > Perhaps a group of people could get together and
work on fixing up the
> > > > > > annoyances people have with it?
>
> > > > > It''d be nice to get some input from the core
team on this, but I''ve
> > > > > always seen ActiveResource as the "almost
unused" part of rails. It''s
> > > > > useful (mostly) when you have another rails app
providing the web
> > > > > service, and that''s not always the case (when
you don''t, you usually
> > > > > need to add enough glue around that it ends up being
easier to use
> > > > > something else.)
>
> > > > > Has the core team thought about splitting
ActiveResource out of the
> > > > > main rails framework, as ActionWebService did a while
back?
>
> > > > > -foca
>
> > > > > > On Friday, 13 May 2011 at 9:14 AM, Paul Campbell
wrote:
>
> > > > > > ActiveResource has always promised great things,
but it''s still
> > > > > > something of a dream.
>
> > > > > > I''d love to see some progress.
Particularly against the context of
> > > > > > things like Paul Dix''s book
> > > > >
>http://www.amazon.com/Service-Oriented-Design-Rails-Addison-Wesley-Pr...
>
> > > > > > —P
>
> > > > > > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Nick Urban
<nickur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > I don''t have a good idea of the pros and
cons of turning Active
> > > > > > Resource into a gem, but if that were to happen,
it does seem like
> > > > > > Active Resource might become more free to evolve
quickly and
> > > > > > independently of the rest of Rails. Perhaps
someone who is more
> > > > > > knowledgeable could comment further.
>
> > > > > > Nick
>
> > > > > > On May 12, 3:54 pm, Prem Sichanugrist
<sikand...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > [Disclaimer: I''m not a core team member]
>
> > > > > > I think if you would, It''d be great if
you''d fork it and maintain it. I
> > > > > > don''t really see much effort to it
either, and I don''t know how to *patch*
> > > > > > it since I''m not using it regularly.
>
> > > > > > I think I''d then try to convince the core
team to remove it, and then
> > > > > > suggest people to use that gem instead.
>
> > > > > > - Prem
>
> > > > > > On 12 พ.ค. 2554, at 17:49, Nick Urban wrote:
>
> > > > > > There are a number of additional features I
required for a current
> > > > > > project. I was able to solve some of these by
using "Reactive
> > > > > > Resource"
(https://github.com/justinweiss/reactive_resource) but many
> > > > > > I had to implement as override of various sorts.
It seems like a
> > > > > > better solution would be to build some more
flexibility into Active
> > > > > > Resource itself.
>
> > > > > > I notice that Active Resource hasn''t
really changed since 3.0.0. Is
> > > > > > anybody working on this right now? Is there a
maintainer I should talk
> > > > > > to regarding potential patches?
>
> > > > > > Thanks,
>
> > > > > > Nick
>
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > For more options, visit this group
> > > > > >
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > >
>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > > > > --
>
> > > > > > Paul Campbell
> > > > > > p...@hypertiny.ie
> > > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > > > > > webhttp://hypertiny.ie
> > > > > > bloghttp://www.pabcas.com
> > > > > > twitterhttp://www.twitter.com/paulca
> > > > > > githubhttp://www.github.com/paulca
> > > > > > phone +353 87 914 8162
> > > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > >
>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > >
>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to
the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > --
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

I''m happy with whatever the consensus is (gem or core).

I''d like to suggest we make a list of features which AR should have
and doesn''t and then we can figure out what sort of changes will
support those features and not duplicate each other''s efforts.

The problems which I have had to deal with in my own code are:
- converting to/from camel case
- resource paths with no extension
- being able to specify which attributes are sent instead of sending
them all

Wishlist:
- Hooks!
- Expand the power of the "schema" (possibly fold in the feature that
lets you send / ignore certain attributes)

I understand Markus is working on associations. Reactive Resource also
adds associations.

Ryan and Pierre, I''m curious what features you are adding.

Thanks,

Nick

On May 16, 12:12 pm, markusschwed <ma.sch...@googlemail.com>
wrote:
> Hello guys,
>
> I''m working (with a friend of mine) on improving ActiveResource.
> Currently, we work at this pull request and we''re adding a
belongs_to
> method for finishing it:
>
> https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/230
>
> I would love to see that ActiveResource stay in Rails core and get
> more attention by it''s maintainers because it has a lot of
potential
> to become a really usefull piece of software,
> but even if it get moved into a new gem we will continue developing on
> it.
>
> What do you guys think about it?
>
> Greetz
> Markus
>
> On 16 Mai, 17:18, Jamie Rumbelow <ja...@jamierumbelow.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > I''ll offer to maintain it, I''ve been looking for a
chance to get involved with Rails in a better way. I''m a student stuck
in the middle of exams right now, but am starting a job heading up the dev team
on a Ruby/Rails project in a couple of months so will be involved heavily then.
I know the guys behind the new company really want to be contributing to open
source, and I certainly do, so they will be resources backed to helping maintain
it.
>
> > How does this kind of thing usually work? Does it involve some kind of
interview, or is it just a "first come, first serve" take it or leave
it basis?
>
> > Jamie
>
> > ---------------
> > Jamie Rumbelow
> > Writer, Speaker, Geek
> > ja...@jamierumbelow.net |http://jamieonsoftware.com
> > +44 (0)7956 363875
>
> > On Monday, 16 May 2011 at 16:14, Prem Sichanugrist wrote:
> > > I''ve extracted it to another project and remove it from
the Rails source yesterday. I sent the pull request and got closed right away.
>
> > > So it seems like someone has to maintain it.
>
> > > On May 16, 2011, at 11:12 AM, Nick Urban wrote:
>
> > > > So this brings me back to my initial question: who is in
charge of
> > > > this right now? If we wanted to make a gem, as everyone
seems to be
> > > > suggesting, how would the transition happen?
>
> > > > On May 13, 7:49 pm, Guillermo Iguaran
<guilleigua...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > I totally agree, ActiveResource needs to be resurrected
either within or out of the framework as independent project.
>
> > > > > There is even a very interesting pull request (to add
initial support for associations) waiting for review:
>
> > > > >https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/230
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > Guillermo Iguaran
>
> > > > > On Thursday, May 12, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Nicolás
Sanguinetti wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Ryan BIgg
<radarliste...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > I''m working with ActiveResource at
the moment and I do find it a bit lacking
> > > > > > > personally. Having to implement the find_by_*
methods myself is one of my
> > > > > > > prime annoyances at the moment.
> > > > > > > Perhaps a group of people could get together
and work on fixing up the
> > > > > > > annoyances people have with it?
>
> > > > > > It''d be nice to get some input from the
core team on this, but I''ve
> > > > > > always seen ActiveResource as the "almost
unused" part of rails. It''s
> > > > > > useful (mostly) when you have another rails app
providing the web
> > > > > > service, and that''s not always the case
(when you don''t, you usually
> > > > > > need to add enough glue around that it ends up
being easier to use
> > > > > > something else.)
>
> > > > > > Has the core team thought about splitting
ActiveResource out of the
> > > > > > main rails framework, as ActionWebService did a
while back?
>
> > > > > > -foca
>
> > > > > > > On Friday, 13 May 2011 at 9:14 AM, Paul
Campbell wrote:
>
> > > > > > > ActiveResource has always promised great
things, but it''s still
> > > > > > > something of a dream.
>
> > > > > > > I''d love to see some progress.
Particularly against the context of
> > > > > > > things like Paul Dix''s book
> > > > > >
>http://www.amazon.com/Service-Oriented-Design-Rails-Addison-Wesley-Pr...
>
> > > > > > > —P
>
> > > > > > > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Nick Urban
<nickur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > I don''t have a good idea of the pros
and cons of turning Active
> > > > > > > Resource into a gem, but if that were to
happen, it does seem like
> > > > > > > Active Resource might become more free to
evolve quickly and
> > > > > > > independently of the rest of Rails. Perhaps
someone who is more
> > > > > > > knowledgeable could comment further.
>
> > > > > > > Nick
>
> > > > > > > On May 12, 3:54 pm, Prem Sichanugrist
<sikand...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > [Disclaimer: I''m not a core team
member]
>
> > > > > > > I think if you would, It''d be great
if you''d fork it and maintain it. I
> > > > > > > don''t really see much effort to it
either, and I don''t know how to *patch*
> > > > > > > it since I''m not using it regularly.
>
> > > > > > > I think I''d then try to convince the
core team to remove it, and then
> > > > > > > suggest people to use that gem instead.
>
> > > > > > > - Prem
>
> > > > > > > On 12 พ.ค. 2554, at 17:49, Nick Urban wrote:
>
> > > > > > > There are a number of additional features I
required for a current
> > > > > > > project. I was able to solve some of these by
using "Reactive
> > > > > > > Resource"
(https://github.com/justinweiss/reactive_resource) but many
> > > > > > > I had to implement as override of various
sorts. It seems like a
> > > > > > > better solution would be to build some more
flexibility into Active
> > > > > > > Resource itself.
>
> > > > > > > I notice that Active Resource hasn''t
really changed since 3.0.0. Is
> > > > > > > anybody working on this right now? Is there a
maintainer I should talk
> > > > > > > to regarding potential patches?
>
> > > > > > > Thanks,
>
> > > > > > > Nick
>
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > >
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > For more options, visit this group
> > > > > > >
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > >
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > >
>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > > > > > --
>
> > > > > > > Paul Campbell
> > > > > > > p...@hypertiny.ie
> > > > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > > > > > > webhttp://hypertiny.ie
> > > > > > > bloghttp://www.pabcas.com
> > > > > > > twitterhttp://www.twitter.com/paulca
> > > > > > > githubhttp://www.github.com/paulca
> > > > > > > phone +353 87 914 8162
> > > > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > >
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > >
>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > >
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > >
>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > > --
> > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > --
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

Oh, another thing I''ve added which would be great to have built-in is
easily toggleable request logging, so you can see what''s happening,
and warnings when requests look suspicious (e.g. missing a path
parameter).

On May 17, 10:35 am, Nick Urban <nickur...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I''m happy with whatever the consensus is (gem or core).
>
> I''d like to suggest we make a list of features which AR should
have
> and doesn''t and then we can figure out what sort of changes will
> support those features and not duplicate each other''s efforts.
>
> The problems which I have had to deal with in my own code are:
> - converting to/from camel case
> - resource paths with no extension
> - being able to specify which attributes are sent instead of sending
> them all
>
> Wishlist:
> - Hooks!
> - Expand the power of the "schema" (possibly fold in the feature
that
> lets you send / ignore certain attributes)
>
> I understand Markus is working on associations. Reactive Resource also
> adds associations.
>
> Ryan and Pierre, I''m curious what features you are adding.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nick
>
> On May 16, 12:12 pm, markusschwed <ma.sch...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hello guys,
>
> > I''m working (with a friend of mine) on improving
ActiveResource.
> > Currently, we work at this pull request and we''re adding a
belongs_to
> > method for finishing it:
>
> >https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/230
>
> > I would love to see that ActiveResource stay in Rails core and get
> > more attention by it''s maintainers because it has a lot of
potential
> > to become a really usefull piece of software,
> > but even if it get moved into a new gem we will continue developing on
> > it.
>
> > What do you guys think about it?
>
> > Greetz
> > Markus
>
> > On 16 Mai, 17:18, Jamie Rumbelow <ja...@jamierumbelow.net>
wrote:
>
> > > I''ll offer to maintain it, I''ve been looking
for a chance to get involved with Rails in a better way. I''m a student
stuck in the middle of exams right now, but am starting a job heading up the dev
team on a Ruby/Rails project in a couple of months so will be involved heavily
then. I know the guys behind the new company really want to be contributing to
open source, and I certainly do, so they will be resources backed to helping
maintain it.
>
> > > How does this kind of thing usually work? Does it involve some
kind of interview, or is it just a "first come, first serve" take it
or leave it basis?
>
> > > Jamie
>
> > > ---------------
> > > Jamie Rumbelow
> > > Writer, Speaker, Geek
> > > ja...@jamierumbelow.net |http://jamieonsoftware.com
> > > +44 (0)7956 363875
>
> > > On Monday, 16 May 2011 at 16:14, Prem Sichanugrist wrote:
> > > > I''ve extracted it to another project and remove it
from the Rails source yesterday. I sent the pull request and got closed right
away.
>
> > > > So it seems like someone has to maintain it.
>
> > > > On May 16, 2011, at 11:12 AM, Nick Urban wrote:
>
> > > > > So this brings me back to my initial question: who is
in charge of
> > > > > this right now? If we wanted to make a gem, as everyone
seems to be
> > > > > suggesting, how would the transition happen?
>
> > > > > On May 13, 7:49 pm, Guillermo Iguaran
<guilleigua...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > I totally agree, ActiveResource needs to be
resurrected either within or out of the framework as independent project.
>
> > > > > > There is even a very interesting pull request (to
add initial support for associations) waiting for review:
>
> > > > > >https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/230
>
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Guillermo Iguaran
>
> > > > > > On Thursday, May 12, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Nicolás
Sanguinetti wrote:
> > > > > > > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Ryan BIgg
<radarliste...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > I''m working with ActiveResource
at the moment and I do find it a bit lacking
> > > > > > > > personally. Having to implement the
find_by_* methods myself is one of my
> > > > > > > > prime annoyances at the moment.
> > > > > > > > Perhaps a group of people could get
together and work on fixing up the
> > > > > > > > annoyances people have with it?
>
> > > > > > > It''d be nice to get some input from
the core team on this, but I''ve
> > > > > > > always seen ActiveResource as the
"almost unused" part of rails. It''s
> > > > > > > useful (mostly) when you have another rails
app providing the web
> > > > > > > service, and that''s not always the
case (when you don''t, you usually
> > > > > > > need to add enough glue around that it ends
up being easier to use
> > > > > > > something else.)
>
> > > > > > > Has the core team thought about splitting
ActiveResource out of the
> > > > > > > main rails framework, as ActionWebService did
a while back?
>
> > > > > > > -foca
>
> > > > > > > > On Friday, 13 May 2011 at 9:14 AM, Paul
Campbell wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > ActiveResource has always promised great
things, but it''s still
> > > > > > > > something of a dream.
>
> > > > > > > > I''d love to see some progress.
Particularly against the context of
> > > > > > > > things like Paul Dix''s book
> > > > > > >
>http://www.amazon.com/Service-Oriented-Design-Rails-Addison-Wesley-Pr...
>
> > > > > > > > —P
>
> > > > > > > > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Nick
Urban <nickur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > I don''t have a good idea of the
pros and cons of turning Active
> > > > > > > > Resource into a gem, but if that were to
happen, it does seem like
> > > > > > > > Active Resource might become more free
to evolve quickly and
> > > > > > > > independently of the rest of Rails.
Perhaps someone who is more
> > > > > > > > knowledgeable could comment further.
>
> > > > > > > > Nick
>
> > > > > > > > On May 12, 3:54 pm, Prem Sichanugrist
<sikand...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > [Disclaimer: I''m not a core
team member]
>
> > > > > > > > I think if you would, It''d be
great if you''d fork it and maintain it. I
> > > > > > > > don''t really see much effort to
it either, and I don''t know how to *patch*
> > > > > > > > it since I''m not using it
regularly.
>
> > > > > > > > I think I''d then try to
convince the core team to remove it, and then
> > > > > > > > suggest people to use that gem instead.
>
> > > > > > > > - Prem
>
> > > > > > > > On 12 พ.ค. 2554, at 17:49, Nick Urban
wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > There are a number of additional
features I required for a current
> > > > > > > > project. I was able to solve some of
these by using "Reactive
> > > > > > > > Resource"
(https://github.com/justinweiss/reactive_resource) but many
> > > > > > > > I had to implement as override of
various sorts. It seems like a
> > > > > > > > better solution would be to build some
more flexibility into Active
> > > > > > > > Resource itself.
>
> > > > > > > > I notice that Active Resource
hasn''t really changed since 3.0.0. Is
> > > > > > > > anybody working on this right now? Is
there a maintainer I should talk
> > > > > > > > to regarding potential patches?
>
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
>
> > > > > > > > Nick
>
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > You received this message because you
are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send
email to
> > > > > > > >
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > > For more options, visit this group
> > > > > > > >
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > You received this message because you
are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send
email to
> > > > > > > >
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > > >
>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > > > > > > --
>
> > > > > > > > Paul Campbell
> > > > > > > > p...@hypertiny.ie
> > > > > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > > > > > > > webhttp://hypertiny.ie
> > > > > > > > bloghttp://www.pabcas.com
> > > > > > > > twitterhttp://www.twitter.com/paulca
> > > > > > > > githubhttp://www.github.com/paulca
> > > > > > > > phone +353 87 914 8162
> > > > > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > You received this message because you
are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send
email to
> > > > > > > >
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > > >
>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > You received this message because you
are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send
email to
> > > > > > > >
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > > >
>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to
the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>
> > > > --
> > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > To post to this group, send...
>
> read more »
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

El Mon, 16 de May de 2011, a las 11:12:02AM -0700, markusschwed
dijo:
> Hello guys,
> 
> I''m working (with a friend of mine) on improving ActiveResource.
> Currently, we work at this pull request and we''re adding a
belongs_to
> method for finishing it:
Hi, I sent a pull request before your pull request that adds some basic
associations to ARes and it has belongs_to see:

https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/70

> 
> https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/230
> 
> I would love to see that ActiveResource stay in Rails core and get
> more attention by it''s maintainers because it has a lot of
potential
> to become a really usefull piece of software,
> but even if it get moved into a new gem we will continue developing on
> it.
> 
> What do you guys think about it?
> 
> Greetz
> Markus
> 
> 
> On 16 Mai, 17:18, Jamie Rumbelow <ja...@jamierumbelow.net> wrote:
> > I''ll offer to maintain it, I''ve been looking for a
chance to get involved with Rails in a better way. I''m a student stuck
in the middle of exams right now, but am starting a job heading up the dev team
on a Ruby/Rails project in a couple of months so will be involved heavily then.
I know the guys behind the new company really want to be contributing to open
source, and I certainly do, so they will be resources backed to helping maintain
it.
> >
> > How does this kind of thing usually work? Does it involve some kind of
interview, or is it just a "first come, first serve" take it or leave
it basis?
> >
> > Jamie
> >
> > ---------------
> > Jamie Rumbelow
> > Writer, Speaker, Geek
> > ja...@jamierumbelow.net |http://jamieonsoftware.com
> > +44 (0)7956 363875
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Monday, 16 May 2011 at 16:14, Prem Sichanugrist wrote:
> > > I''ve extracted it to another project and remove it from
the Rails source yesterday. I sent the pull request and got closed right away.
> >
> > > So it seems like someone has to maintain it.
> >
> > > On May 16, 2011, at 11:12 AM, Nick Urban wrote:
> >
> > > > So this brings me back to my initial question: who is in
charge of
> > > > this right now? If we wanted to make a gem, as everyone
seems to be
> > > > suggesting, how would the transition happen?
> >
> > > > On May 13, 7:49 pm, Guillermo Iguaran
<guilleigua...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > I totally agree, ActiveResource needs to be resurrected
either within or out of the framework as independent project.
> >
> > > > > There is even a very interesting pull request (to add
initial support for associations) waiting for review:
> >
> > > > >https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/230
> >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Guillermo Iguaran
> >
> > > > > On Thursday, May 12, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Nicolás
Sanguinetti wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Ryan BIgg
<radarliste...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > I''m working with ActiveResource at
the moment and I do find it a bit lacking
> > > > > > > personally. Having to implement the find_by_*
methods myself is one of my
> > > > > > > prime annoyances at the moment.
> > > > > > > Perhaps a group of people could get together
and work on fixing up the
> > > > > > > annoyances people have with it?
> >
> > > > > > It''d be nice to get some input from the
core team on this, but I''ve
> > > > > > always seen ActiveResource as the "almost
unused" part of rails. It''s
> > > > > > useful (mostly) when you have another rails app
providing the web
> > > > > > service, and that''s not always the case
(when you don''t, you usually
> > > > > > need to add enough glue around that it ends up
being easier to use
> > > > > > something else.)
> >
> > > > > > Has the core team thought about splitting
ActiveResource out of the
> > > > > > main rails framework, as ActionWebService did a
while back?
> >
> > > > > > -foca
> >
> > > > > > > On Friday, 13 May 2011 at 9:14 AM, Paul
Campbell wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > ActiveResource has always promised great
things, but it''s still
> > > > > > > something of a dream.
> >
> > > > > > > I''d love to see some progress.
Particularly against the context of
> > > > > > > things like Paul Dix''s book
> > > > > >
>http://www.amazon.com/Service-Oriented-Design-Rails-Addison-Wesley-Pr...
> >
> > > > > > > —P
> >
> > > > > > > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Nick Urban
<nickur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > I don''t have a good idea of the pros
and cons of turning Active
> > > > > > > Resource into a gem, but if that were to
happen, it does seem like
> > > > > > > Active Resource might become more free to
evolve quickly and
> > > > > > > independently of the rest of Rails. Perhaps
someone who is more
> > > > > > > knowledgeable could comment further.
> >
> > > > > > > Nick
> >
> > > > > > > On May 12, 3:54 pm, Prem Sichanugrist
<sikand...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > [Disclaimer: I''m not a core team
member]
> >
> > > > > > > I think if you would, It''d be great
if you''d fork it and maintain it. I
> > > > > > > don''t really see much effort to it
either, and I don''t know how to *patch*
> > > > > > > it since I''m not using it regularly.
> >
> > > > > > > I think I''d then try to convince the
core team to remove it, and then
> > > > > > > suggest people to use that gem instead.
> >
> > > > > > > - Prem
> >
> > > > > > > On 12 พ.ค. 2554, at 17:49, Nick Urban wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > There are a number of additional features I
required for a current
> > > > > > > project. I was able to solve some of these by
using "Reactive
> > > > > > > Resource"
(https://github.com/justinweiss/reactive_resource) but many
> > > > > > > I had to implement as override of various
sorts. It seems like a
> > > > > > > better solution would be to build some more
flexibility into Active
> > > > > > > Resource itself.
> >
> > > > > > > I notice that Active Resource hasn''t
really changed since 3.0.0. Is
> > > > > > > anybody working on this right now? Is there a
maintainer I should talk
> > > > > > > to regarding potential patches?
> >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> >
> > > > > > > Nick
> >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > >
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > For more options, visit this group
> > > > > > >
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > >
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > >
>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> >
> > > > > > > --
> >
> > > > > > > Paul Campbell
> > > > > > > p...@hypertiny.ie
> > > > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > > > > > > webhttp://hypertiny.ie
> > > > > > > bloghttp://www.pabcas.com
> > > > > > > twitterhttp://www.twitter.com/paulca
> > > > > > > githubhttp://www.github.com/paulca
> > > > > > > phone +353 87 914 8162
> > > > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > >
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > >
>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > >
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > >
>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> >
> > > > --
> > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> >
> > > --
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> > > To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
> 
-- 
"Most of you are familiar with the virtues of a programmer.  There are
three, of
course: laziness, impatience, and hubris."

(Larry Wall)


+-------------------------------------+
Gastón Ramos
http://gastonramos.com.ar/
GNU/Linux Counter user #450312

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.