#Foreign keys work just fine with Active Record, they're just not #currently dumped in the Ruby-representation of the schema (an #optional, but very nice feature).
ah, thanks. the feature can really help.
#But neither are stored procedures, #constraints in general, views, etc.
not interested in them really. but it helps to know. Just imagine if you're perfect app got screwed because of some lousy dba script and you never knew!
#So the Ruby-representation is for #application-database designs that are uninterested in having a clever #database.
agree. we app programmers care less on the database. But let us face it, dba's have become powerful (they even get more pay). And it pays to know how they are getting clever w my db. If my db fails, so does my app. If i can get the fullschema, all one has to do is compare the dba constraints with my app constraints.. It's unit testing again at the business level.. Having control of both the app and the db makes the app programmer king again!
#Composite primary keys are not supported at all right now.
fr the rate rails is advancing, i do not think i have to worry much
btw, i showed my kid how to do some rails thingy and he was really amused. We laughed and laughed. You should see how a boy laughs. I was overjoyed.
thanks for rails and all the rails developers (thanks to ruby & ruby community too).
WRT osCommerce or any other call to action to build an app... it's been
my experience that there are 2 types of open source / community apps:
1) the kind where someone wants to rally a bunch of people to help them
build something (not very successfully) and 2) the kind where someone
takes an initial stab at doing something, then releases it to the
community and asks for help (way more successful, provided it shows
promise).
I lost all interest in Rail Frog because they spent a good month
discussing stuff and building infrastructure instead of just blazing
ahead with some damn code.
WRT osCommerce or any other call to action to build an app... it's been
my experience that there are 2 types of open source / community apps:
1) the kind where someone wants to rally a bunch of people to help them
build something (not very successfully) and 2) the kind where someone
takes an initial stab at doing something, then releases it to the
community and asks for help (way more successful, provided it shows
promise).
I too believe this dichotomy to have a strong correlation to failure
and success. An invitation for participation before you have something
real is a kiss of death. Before there is something with vision,
something that works, you should nod and smile, but kindly ask people
to stay patient.
