It seems the consensus on this list is that if you want to use
ActiveResource, you have to give up making changes, refactoring, or
agile development - or at least work very hard if you want to do so.
I guess I didn't make my point clear earlier. If you change your API,
will clients still function the same? Or will you have to make
special cases for them, regardless of what tools you use create the
For example, say you build a webservice and change the name of a
function or move a database table. Now you have to go back and change
your code in the first place, correct? So, how is this any different
than using ARes? Make a special case, move on with your life. New
clients and those who can update will; those who won't can be caught
by the special case code.
Even further, if you make huge sweeping changes, your clients are
going to have to update anyhow (and I see changing database schemas as
a pretty big change...).
I fail to see the difference in effort here.
Any bets on whether they'll be even one succesful app in production
within 12 months with heterogenous clients (that is, written by other
developers, outside the source tree of the app, even in different
lanaguages) consuming ActiveResource API's?
Done. I'm running our dorm security app on our campus here on Rails
Edge. It uses ActiveResource and interfaces with a Python application
I wrote last year and a Perl app (that used to interface with a Java
application) that someone else wrote way before my time. It has about
1000-2000 users a day. What do I win for the bet?