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 <[email protected]> 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
[email protected] | 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
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 [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.


--


Paul Campbell
[email protected]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
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 [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
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 [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
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 [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
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 [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
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 [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
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 [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
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 [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

Reply via email to