How are you using EngineY?

[Timothy Fisher]

I've noticed an increase in downloads and usage of EngineY over the past few months.  I've also noticed that the discussion traffic in here has begun to pick up over that same time.  I'm curious as to what people are doing with EngineY?  As its creator, I'd love to hear how you are making use of it and whether or not you are successful with it.

Thanks,
Tim

[Tom Scott]

I like it but it's a little outdated, as Rails 3 has come out and even been updated to 3.0.3. Rails 3 is very different and actually saves a lot of code, but the EngineY project probably requires a complete overhaul in order to make it happen. The codebase also seems a bit bloated, I noticed a LOT of migrations that aren't used, are empty, or simply didn't need to be there...like any AddTo<table>Migration, because you can simply re-create the dev database every time. While they may have been relevant for users upgrading to future versions of EY and not losing their whole DB table, there's probably no way this codebase could be upgraded to Rails 3 without a complete overhaul of its structure, so the database would have to go regardless.

Although I abandoned EngineY on a production level (the app I was developing required way too much customization on the EngineY codebase...), I still refer to how you accomplished a lot of social networking goals using Rails in my own applications. So I thank you for that. :)

-T

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "EngineY" group.
To post to this group, send email to eng...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to enginey+u...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/enginey?hl=en.

[Timothy Fisher]

Tom,

Thanks for the feedback.  I don't think that the Rails 3 port will be as intensive as you seem to think.  I am going to begin that work very soon.  The reason I have not yet moved to Rails 3 is because the majority of deployed Rails installations are still on Rails 2.  Rails 3 is still new and not many have moved to it yet, and many hosting providers do not yet support it.  As I may more progress on the Rails 3 update I'll give you some additional feedback. 

The migrations are setup so that a develop does not have to blow away their database to upgrade to the latest code.  That's the way I always recommend migrations should be written.  I don't think its a great practice to change existing migrations when that db structure needs to be changed, thus the additional migrations are there.

Glad to hear you've been able to learn something from the framework.

Best of luck,
Tim

[Steven Rogers]

On Jan 6, 2011, at 3:05 PM, Timothy Fisher wrote:

> The migrations are setup so that a develop does not have to blow away their database to upgrade to the latest code. That's the way I always recommend migrations should be written. I don't think its a great practice to change existing migrations when that db structure needs to be changed, thus the additional migrations are there.

I agree - you can always recreate your database, but that's not really the point. The whole idea is to be able to use the new code without destroying what you have.

SR