Eero Saynatkari
10/10/2006 7:40:00 PM
On 2006.10.11 04:25, Bil Kleb wrote:
> I got the following internal email this morning; and
> because I've only dabbled in Camping, Rails, and web aps
> in general--I'm a floating-point number cruncher guy--I
> thought I'd run it pass you before responding:
>
> I'm working on archiving [..] data for [a] project,
> and [the Principal Investigator] mentioned using Ruby
> as opposed to straight perl cgi. I am a "data modeler"
> and have just branched into the perl cgi arena, due
> to [staffing issues]. (Basically, they don't have web
> programmers that can do anything other than ColdFusion).
>
> Anyway, I would like to meet with you to talk about Ruby
> and it's pros/cons in general, and possibly in relation
> to the project [mentioned above].
>
> I have heard that Ruby on Rails is only "easy" if your
> data model/schema is simple, and you only present one
> table's worth of info on a form. I'll bring a copy of
> the E-R diagram to discuss, if that will help in determining
> in Ruby is the right language to use for this application.
The only problem you are likely to encounter is fitting your
existing schema to fit AR's model if going with Rails (and
not replacing AR at the backend).
Remember, though, to mention Nitro and IOWA also. Both have
ORMs that work better with legacy database schemas.
> I also have the forms defined in html (used these for working
> with [the PI] in determining what metadata to capture). It
> looks like I would have to "redo" all the html to use Ruby
> methods?
>
> I'm also interested in the "security" aspects of using Ruby.
> PHP (as opposed to ColdFusion) has been identified as having
> too many security issues and therefore not encouraged here,
> so I'm curious about Ruby/Ruby on Rails....
>
> Oh, and the database is implemented in Postgres.
Nonissue, whether though DBI, native drivers or an ORM.
> Thanks in advance for any light you can shed.
You probably want to push this to the Rails list, they
are always happy to defend their implementation.