Re: Ruby On Rails on the iSeries

["AJ Thomas" <ajthomas.iseries@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

What I like about Rails, and don't like about IBM's solutions, is that
it does the hard work for me and leaves me to solve my problem. More
importantly it gets you to your solutions quickly, install/run wow
I've just created a blog. On the iSeries I think the reason lots of
people use RPG-CGI is because you only have to learn QtmhWrStout and
one or two Apache directives and wham you're a web developer straight
from your good old RPG. The other beauty about RoR is that I can
download it on to any Mac/PC/Linux box and play with it for free. If I
want to learn one of IBM's solutions I have to get my head around
WDSC, WAS and IBM's licencing rules just for having a look. I believe
that if IBM were serious about moving iSeries developers forward they
should find a "press this button-change code here" solution. Get a
green screen menu option that sets up the "dirty stuff" and lets you
write an RPG program. Why should an RPG programmer have to learn Java
Servlets first, when most times they will end up copying an existing
solution anyway? I know IBM want to sell stuff, but I think they may
sell more if they make the first step easy, we can go back to the
complicated things when we feel comfortable.

I love the RoR "opinionated software" approach too; do it this way
because it's easy and works. If you want to do something else then by
all means go and study and then do it you way, but if you want to be
productive now do it this way and get on with it. Perhaps IBM should
occasionally be a bit dictatorial :-)

On 15/08/06, Nathan Andelin <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Jon,
>
> I read in an IBM publication that EGL roots go back to 1981 to a product named 
> CSP, which later became Visual Age Generator, then finally evolved into EGL, so 
> your point is well taken.  This thread isn't about IBM undercutting it's 
> business partners, though.
>
> One architectural distinction between RAILS and EGL is that RAILS components 
> inherit the vast amount of their capabilities from base classes, under the 
> proposition that developers should be able to create Web applications by 
> writing as little code as possible, allowing them to focus more on business 
> solutions than underlying infrastructure.
>
> If you're not satisfied with the underlying foundation of RAILS, then you 
> probably need to look at something else.  It's hard to know what constraints 
> you might run into, but it seems generally true that architectures that rely 
> heavily on inheritance seem to be less flexible.
>
> Java frameworks tend to focus on one aspect of the MVC design paradigm.  For 
> example, you might use Struts for the controller, Hybernate for the model, and 
> Velocity for the view.  Rails on the other hand incorporates all three into one 
> framework.  Hopefully you'd get better integration that way, but it could also 
> force developers into a rigid infrastructure.
>
> In my case, a discussion like this is pretty theoretical.  I don't plan on 
> doing anything with EGL or Rails or Java.  People can build OO frameworks 
> around SQL interfaces to their hearts content but it still doesn't beat record 
> level access and business logic via RPG, IMO.
>
> Nathan Andelin.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Jon Paris <Jon.Paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: web400@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 9:36:50 AM
> Subject: Re: [WEB400] Ruby On Rails on the iSeries
>
>  >> but when their products reach a certain level of success, IBM releases
> something to compete against it.  EGL seems to be that way.
>
> I'm not going to disagree with your basic premise that IBM can sometimes
> "muscle out" a BP Nathan - although "buying out" is often the way.
>
> However, you can't use EGL as an example.  EGL is just the latest name in a
> long series of names for what is fundamentally the same tool that has been
> around for years.  In fact a 400 version has been around for years way back
> to the days of (shudder) AD/Cycle.  Prior to being known as EGL it was
> VisualAge Generator - can't recall the other various names it has gone by.
>
> Jon Paris
> Partner400
>
> www.Partner400.com
>
> --
> This is the Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries (WEB400) mailing list
> To post a message email: WEB400@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/web400
> or email: WEB400-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/web400.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> This is the Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries (WEB400) mailing list
> To post a message email: WEB400@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/web400
> or email: WEB400-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/web400.