Raf Jaf wrote: [...] > The point of avoiding ActiveRecord is because our data sources are > disparate, meaning that they include databases, mainframes, and, in some > cases, sources that expose only a message-based interfaces (JMS, etc).
ActiveRecord and ActiveResource will have no problem with this. > Furthermore, data from these sources needs to be mapped and processed > through rules before being populated in model objects and presented to > the client. Our Java data services layer handles all of this, so it's > just a matter of integration Rails/Ruby with that interface. Don't bother. ActiveRecord can handle that too. > We intend > to use Rails for our presentation tier only, not as a end-to-end > solution. Then you are making a very poor decision. Stop now. Rails is an end-to-end solution. Either use it as one or go with something like Sinatra or Ramaze that is better suited to your use case. > > The Java framework already exists, and we want to reuse what we have > available. > > Does that make sense now? No, for the reasons above. Best, -- Marnen Laibow-Koser http://www.marnen.org [email protected] -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" 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-talk?hl=en.
