PHP scripts are easier to deploy then Rails apps, at least at the moment; for small stuff - "contact us" forms - I wouldn't bother creating a Rails application. For larger apps, in my opinion, you'll have quicker development and easier maintainability by switching to Ruby on Rails.
That being said, realize that Rails is a *very* opinionated environment - Rails wants you to use artificial primary keys, validate in your models (vs database), singular models and plural tables, etc. Working within Rails constraints can be a joy; bumping up against them all the time is painful. (This is deliberate - a more flexible system would require more typing and more configuration. The assumptions Rails make speeds up your development significantly.)
Of course, note that Ruby itself isn't opinionated; there are a number of promising web frameworks which differ from Rails and different approaches. (Mack, merb, etc.)
I agree that Rails apps still aren't as easy to deploy as simple single-page PHP scripts. But that's what happens when you've got a whole framework to deploy, right? I would argue that these days, a Rails-based application isn't much more difficult to deploy than a comparative PHP framework-based application, though (like CakePHP, Symfony, etc)...
The Passenger Apache Module has made it pretty easy to get started with Rails on the deployment side of things. Check it out if you're unfamiliar with it. Simply gem install passenger, then run the command to compile and install the module and edit your vhost directive. Things get even easier once you learn and start using Capistrano as part of your deployment routine.
posted 11 years ago
IMHO, it's easier to deploy a Rails app than a CakePHP app. Recent builds may have improved, but last time I had to deploy a CakePHP app significant and nonobvious mod_rewrite'age had to happen before it would work. (It worked fine on my test server, of course.)
Going along with what Nick said, for any non trivial application, you're going to eventually have to deal with automating deployments, db migration, scalability to multiple app servers, etc, and Capistrano is *great* at that.
Take it easy,
David Berube [ September 04, 2008: Message edited by: David Berube ]
I was working on a PHP library for extracting microformats from HTML, when a friend introduced me to Ruby. As an exercise, I decided to rewrite it Ruby, and fell in love and never looked back.
The applications I work on mix front-end and back-end stuff, and on the back-end I think Ruby is a league away from PHP. On the front-end side, for larger applications I'll use Rails, I never used CakePHP so I can't tell if it's better or not. For smaller stuff, I'm going to use a smaller framework like Sinatra, or no framework at all, and it will be either Ruby or PHP, most likely PHP: my site it a WordPress blog, so it's just easier to do everything PHP.
How do you get the active support gem . By the way a gem is a package right? so how can i find such packages or have a look at a list of packages ???
That will show a list of gems you have installed.
posted 9 years ago
I worked a bit on Rails and a bit on cakePHP.
There may be many underlying differences.But, what struck me was, when working with Rails, the framework is "Alive".That is, the framework is talking to you.When working with cakephp, you extend some class and so on.But, the framework isn't interacting.
For e.g., in Rails, when we say Rails G controller <controller name>, a file is automatically created in the appropriate position.Where as, when working with PHP frameworks, you have to manually create those files in their locations.
While it is just a small step, it is very convenient and a pleasure.The simplicity of Rails makes you want to create more things.....just to use the lovely framework.
If we don't do the shopping, we won't have anything for dinner. And I've invited this tiny ad: