Question 1

Is TorqueBox still maintained or safe to use?

Accepted Answer

No, the README clearly states it is no longer actively developed or maintained. It's only suitable for legacy projects or teams willing to fork and maintain it themselves, which adds significant risk.

Question 2

How to package a TorqueBox application as an executable JAR?

Accepted Answer

Refer to the Executable Jar Guide in the documentation for steps, but note that this feature relies on the unmaintained codebase, so testing and adjustments may be needed for current environments.

Question 3

TorqueBox vs Puma for Ruby applications on JRuby?

Accepted Answer

TorqueBox offers integrated enterprise features like messaging and caching on JRuby, while Puma is a lightweight, pure Ruby server focused on concurrency. For new projects, Puma is better supported, but TorqueBox had unique Java integration if needed.

Question 4

Does TorqueBox work with Rails 6 or later versions?

Accepted Answer

Since TorqueBox is unmaintained, compatibility with Rails versions beyond those tested during its active development (likely up to Rails 5) is uncertain and may require manual fixes or community forks.

Question 5

What are the best alternatives to TorqueBox for enterprise Ruby apps?

Accepted Answer

Consider using a combination of Sidekiq for background jobs, Redis for caching and messaging, and Puma or Phusion Passenger for web serving, with JRuby if Java integration is essential, as these are actively maintained.

Question 6

How to migrate from TorqueBox 3 to version 4?

Accepted Answer

The Migration Guide in the documentation covers the substantial changes, but given the project's discontinued state, migration is not recommended for new projects; instead, evaluate modern alternatives.

TorqueBox

What is TorqueBox?

Overview

Use Cases

Best For

Related Projects

Found a gem we're missing?

Not Ideal For

Pros & Cons

Pros

Cons

Frequently Asked Questions