On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Bobby Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > Not yet, I am still fighting with it. Mostly my newbishness around how to > debug these problems in ruby, so at least it's a learning experience. > Jim's response was pretty helpful in clarifying exactly what the problem was > and helping me to understand the radiant environment. The feed me directions > says to make the following edit to your environment.rb file: > change: config.frameworks -= [ :action_webservice, :action_mailer ] > to: config.frameworks -= [ :action_mailer ] > I assume this means that it will now configure radiant to use > actionwebservice if its present. The section of the env file where this > setting is located also has the following comment. > # Skip frameworks you're not going to use (only works if using > vendor/rails). > Which leads me to believe that I need to have actionwebservice in my vendor > directory. I have tried unpacking it to vendor/gems/actionwebservice, but > that didn't seem to do the trick. > To restate the problem for anyone who might have input, we are using the > feed_me extension. It throws the following error when trying to browse to > the api/xmlrpc route: > > undefined method `web_service_dispatching_mode' for ApiController:Class
Rails has abandoned actionwebservice. You might find a more up to date version of it here though http://github.com/datanoise/actionwebservice/network If you can find a gem, you should be able to add config.gem 'actionwebservice', :version => ... whatever version... > > It appears that actionwebservice is not being loaded by radiant. Here is my > current gems > *** LOCAL GEMS *** ... > actionwebservice (1.2.6) .... > radiant (0.9.1) > > > On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 4:44 PM, hamlet <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Had you any luck with extension ? >> I'd like to use it and doesn't really want to dive into that right >> now... >> Regards >> >> On Sep 27, 3:56 pm, Bobby Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Hi Jim, >> > >> > Thanks for the response. I am currently using Radiant (0.9.1) which I >> > was >> > under the impression was Rails 3 compliant. I may have misread that. >> > Thanks >> > for the pointers to other version of AWS, I will give them a shot. >> > >> > Thanks again, >> > Bobby >> > >> > >> > >> > On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 10:58 AM, Jim Gay <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > I'm not very familiar with ActionWebService, but you could check other >> > > forks for support of rails 3 >> > >http://github.com/datanoise/actionwebservice/network >> > >> > > Are you running the rails 3 branch of radiant? Because we bundle rails >> > > 2.3.8 with the current gem (0.9.1) >> > >> > > On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 8:12 AM, Bobby Johnson >> > > <[email protected]> >> > > wrote: >> > > > Ok, so I have dug in a bit more and it looks like ActionWebServive >> > > > was >> > > > replaced with ActionResource which is intended to provide RESTful >> > > interfaces >> > > > of your ActiveRecord entities. Not sure how to make ActionResource >> > > conform >> > > > to the metablogapi xmlrpc api. But I am digging more. Are there any >> > > > good >> > > > docs on testing extensions for Radiant? >> > >> > > > On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Bobby Johnson (NotMyself) >> > > > <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > >> Hi gang, >> > >> > > >> I am attempting to convert my blog over to radiantcms & rails 3. I >> > > >> am >> > > >> getting the following error when trying to hit api/xmlrpc: >> > > >>http://gist.github.com/579241 >> > >> > > >> Now, I have researched myself enough to know that I am running >> > > >> radiant >> > > >> with rails 3 and feed_me has a dependency on actionwebservice which >> > > >> doesn't seem to support rails 3. The extension is simple enough and >> > > >> I >> > > >> want to try to fix it myself. Maybe even make a contribution back >> > > >> to >> > > >> the community. >> > >> > > >> My question is what is the rails 3 way of standing up a web >> > > >> service? I >> > > >> can't seem to find any documentation on it and my google-fu is >> > > >> failing >> > > >> me. >> > >> > > >> Thanks for any pointers in the right direction, even if it's a "go >> > > >> read this" kinda response. >> > >> > > >> Bobby >> > >> > > > -- >> > > > "The explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is most likely to >> > > > be >> > > > correct." >> > >> > > > - Occam’s Razor >> > > >> > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_Razor> >> > >> > > -- >> > > Jim Gay >> > > Saturn Flyer LLC >> > >http://www.saturnflyer.com >> > > 571-403-0338 >> > >> > -- >> > "The explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is most likely to be >> > correct." >> > >> > - Occam’s Razorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor > > > -- > "The explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is most likely to be > correct." > > - Occam’s Razor > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor > -- Jim Gay Saturn Flyer LLC http://www.saturnflyer.com 571-403-0338
