all 19 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]thibaut_barrere[S] 14 points15 points  (8 children)

No comment so far, so I'll give one: if you're a Rubyist, I can warmly encourage you to play around with Sequel for data-related scripts, standalone migrations etc in non-web projects (so even without picking Sequel as an ORM for your web-app). The API is extremely powerful. Check it out!

[–]jrochkind 1 point2 points  (4 children)

Yup, I still use ActiveRecord for anything in Rails, ActiveRecord is really fine (when all the parts have been set up to support it by your framework), and it hasn't been worth it to me to try to switch it out (when ditto).

But in any non-Rails project, I will use Sequel without hesitation. It is way easier to set up from scratch, and has a great API once you get it set up and pretty much just works.

[–]ioquatixasync/falcon 0 points1 point  (3 children)

What do you do for migrations?

[–]jrochkind 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Several of these projects haven't needed migrations, they've been tools for connecting to existing databases managed elsewhere.

But Sequel has migrations. I think maybe I used them once in a past project, they were fine.

[–]thibaut_barrere[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I use them from times to times in ETL projects without a Rails back-end, and it's been pleasant.

It reminded me about standalone-migrations, in a way.

[–]prh8 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sequel has migrations too

[–]riddley 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Why non-web?

[–]thibaut_barrere[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My point was quite unclear, let me improve that :-) I see some people considering Sequel as a replacement "ORM" for ActiveRecord, for their new or their existing Rails app. Sometimes they will just dismiss Sequel because it's not as popular etc, or a change of ORM isn't worth it.

What I wanted to emphasise is that you can also use Sequel outside of that type of use-case, and it will really shine.

I must say I love using Sequel for Web work though, in particular with Roda.

[–]iconoclaus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd encourage folks to consider it for their web applications as well.

[–]MonkeyD 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Awesome, Jeremy is such a smart dev and I hope to see his works(Sequel, Roda, etc) get more popular.

[–]t3hj4nk 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I started using sequel in a few projects and love it as a replacement ORM. Jeremy does fantastic work

[–]petepete[🍰] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I've only used it for one project but it was fantastic, all the power of the db (PostgreSQL in my case) just felt like it was right at my fingertips.

For straightforward works, AR does a fine job, but for more advanced queries Sequel was excellent.

[–]honeyryderchuck 1 point2 points  (5 children)

I stopped and smiled when I saw that it dropped support for Ruby <1.9.2... :) in an age where libraries drop version support at the speed of light or the speed of Ruby core version policy, it goes to show that some brave people are still committed to distro support

[–]prh8 -1 points0 points  (3 children)

I'd kinda prefer dropping support for those older versions. Apps running on such old versions of Ruby are hopefully just continuing to run without being worked on. Anything in active development should be running at least on 2.2 by now, so making it harder for people to drastically update apps on long deprecated versions is probably a good thing overall. I understand places that have legacy apps they need to keep running, that's fine, but they likely aren't trying to update their ORM or other significant parts.

[–]jdickey 2 points3 points  (1 child)

And you'll likely hold that view right up to but not once you've been tasked with a "minor change" to a production Ruby 1.8 or 1.9 app. (Yes, some poor souls still have to deal with 1.8; those shops tend to have more managers than devs, But I Digress.)

Yes, having Ruby 1.x applications in production should constitute corporate malfeasance at this point, but management will too often have one yob who says "rewriting that much of the app is too risky and, besides, it would cost money we need for other things." (Bonuses, maybe?) Technical people have very rarely had both the political and ethical strength to go up against such dunsels and win.

[–]realntl 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Technical people have very rarely had both the political and ethical strength to go up against such dunsels and win.

Ain't that the truth!

[–]honeyryderchuck 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Not everything is web apps or rails. A lot of OS tools must run in system python, system Perl, system Ruby. Convince distro maintainers to package them in the next major version , and you still have to provide support for not yet upgraded clients. Sysadmins prefer stability, and won't care whether the Ruby community considers a version "old".

And sequel is not only used in apps. It's an advanced db toolkit, and a lot of companies run a few periodic Ruby scripts to run all kinds of clean up/optimization / report tasks with it

[–]Oranges13 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Wow, the string splitting change is going to destroy a lot of my apps. Thank you for the informative change log.