Action Web Service has already be bump out of the Rails default stack. Is the Core team still taking patches and enhancements for the library? IMHO, it should be completely removed from Rails Core and given to a team of people who are really interesting in maintaining it.
Kent Sibilev is the current maintainer of AWS, and we're in the process of coordinating exactly this kinda stuff.
Whether it stays in the rails svn repository or moves out, will be entirely up to kent, but he'll definitely be given the relevant access.
+1 that it should be taken seriously. Whether or not you think SOAP is ideal, allowing other people access to our apps in a format they are comfortable with is a big need. Poor SOAP support (both as a client and service) is the #1 weakness of Ruby in the enteprise, IMO.
+1 that it should be taken seriously. Whether or not you think SOAP is ideal, allowing other people access to our apps in a format they are comfortable with is a big need. Poor SOAP support (both as a client and service) is the #1 weakness of Ruby in the enteprise, IMO.
I definitely agree that using SOAP is definitely one of the key weaknesses of most places that call themselves enterprise. Rails has picked its side in the whole WS-* / REST thing, and we're sticking with it.
If you're stuck using SOAP you should probably help with AWS maintenance, drop kent a line and see what's up.
Awesome 
I couldn't have said it better myself!
Thanks for having the courage to keep the good stuff in, and the questionable stuff out.
Jeff softiesonrails.com
Have to disagree here.
First, speaking a language that someone else understands - customer, partners, users, clients, whatever - is not a weakness. I may think that Hindi is a better language than Spanish. But if I'm going to Mexico, learning their language is the right thing.
When I build an app, I want my customers and users to be able to connect to it how they like - not give them a sermon in architecture.
Aside from which, SOAP is well proven software supported on nearly every platform you can think of. ActiveResource at this point is labware. Promising labware, perhaps, but certainly nothing I can expect all of my customers to use.
REST is much larger than ActiveResource. ActiveResource is one implementation of a client library that consumes RESTful resources. If it doesn't suit you, write your own.
Furthermore (and forgive the further abuse of this metaphor, which I think is not entirely accurate), just because you're going to Mexico does not mean you should learn Spanish. It may be more cost-effective in the short-term to hire a translator.
Rails itself has definitely picked sides in the WS-* debate, and REST
is where Rails is going. That does not mean you cannot write
web-services in Rails that use SOAP or XML-RPC, it just means that
you're going to have to grab a plugin and get your hands dirty. Rails,
as you might have heard, is opinionated.
- Jamis
s/supported/supported differently/
Or, to put it more bluntly: http://wanderingbarque.com/nonintersecting/2006/11/15/the-s-stands-for-simple/
- Matt
While it's fun to kick SOAP while it's down, the reality is that people who have to use it still can using ActionWebService. It will continue to work, so long as maintainers jump on board to give kent a hand.
People who feel passionately about rails and SOAP now have the perfect vehicle to channel their energy!