Using ambition to connect to a soap-server

[Mathijs]

Hi,

I read about ambition some time back, when it just started.
While very interested, I never checked it out, wanted it to mature a
bit more.

Now, I have to port some native rails activerecord projects to use
some kind of soap-server to get many of its data/statistics. I
generated a driver for this soap-server using soap4r's wsdl2ruby. The
driver works fine and I can make all calls I need using native ruby
objects. Since the application uses many activerecord-features like
callbacks, associations and named_scopes, I decided to hook in at the
lowest level, which is the database connector.
This basically means I have to translate sql to one or more soap-
calls(available through the driver) to emulate a database. A
configuration file should configure what tables/fields/relations
translate to which soap-calls and objects. Basically, this is a very
ambitious project too, but I think I can get it done.

While thinking about my options, I'm considering ambition again also.
I do like the idea of it, but I don't really want to change the
application itself too much, which is the case with ambition because
of its different select-syntax (which I do like though).
I still consider this option though, if it provides me with an easy
way to swap underlying datasources.
So if I convert my application to ambition-activerecord first, and
then create my own ambition-adapter for the soap-server, it's a valid
option too.

Will ambition provide me with the same functionality as activerecord
has at the moment?
So selecting as well as updating/creating/deleting of data?
I use named_scopes a lot and also callbacks and validations.
So if ambition provides those too (without relying on activerecord
below), ambition is my preferred way to go.
So in other words, is ambition an ORM by itself?

Furthermore, I saw the latest commit (on github) was in april, which
means either the project isn't very active, or it's already perfect.
Which is the case?

Thanks,
Mathijs

[Chris Wanstrath]

On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 1:39 AM, Mathijs <bluesc...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Furthermore, I saw the latest commit (on github) was in april, which
> means either the project isn't very active, or it's already perfect.
> Which is the case?

It's pretty dead unless people want to step up and take over. Most of
the future work needs to be done with adapters - the core should be
more or less complete. It probably has bugs, but I think a lot of the
functionality is there. So hopefully people pick up the torch and
write some adapters. But as for me, I've mostly moved on to other
projects.

--
Chris Wanstrath
http://github.com/defunkt

[Matthew King]

On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 8:17 PM, Chris Wanstrath <ch...@ozmm.org> wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 1:39 AM, Mathijs <bluesc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Furthermore, I saw the latest commit (on github) was in april, which
>> means either the project isn't very active, or it's already perfect.
>> Which is the case?
>
> It's pretty dead unless people want to step up and take over. Most of
> the future work needs to be done with adapters - the core should be
> more or less complete. It probably has bugs, but I think a lot of the
> functionality is there.

This means read-only functionality, to be clear. Adding writability
is feasible, but IIRC will require changes to the core. At this time,
therefore, Ambition adapters can be ORM supplements, but not
replacements.

I don't have time to actively develop Ambition (yet), but I am willing
to take over the administrative duties. Chris, bump my privs on
Rubyforge?

Matthew