Statesman VS AASM

Statesman was developed by the team GoCardless to address some of the limitations in other state machine gems like AASM or state_machine. It offers:

I’d strongly recommend Statesman instead: https://gocardless.com/blog/statesman/

I’m unaffiliated, just have used a lot of Ruby SM libraries.

Honestly state machines are fantastic in Rails too. My last company built [Statesman](https://github.com/gocardless/statesman/) and being able to lean on it to prevent you getting into invalid states is fantastic. You also get the bonus of tracking the history of states your resources went through (which is especially useful when you're dealing with payments).

At some point you'll have to think about query performance on the state transition table, but it'll go further than you think and is firmly in the realm of problems of success.

I know you were doing educational proof of concent. But when I write them, I usually reach for the statesman gem. Makes state machines pretty trivial IME.

When they get to what their implementation is, I’m not even sure what it is. Like how is the following different from a library, like acts-as_state_machine (https://github.com/aasm/aasm). Are they auto running the retries - in a background job which they handle (like “serverless” background job)?

“Implementing orchestration in a library connected to a database means you can eliminate the orchestration tier, pushing its functionality into the application tier (the library instruments your program) and the database tier (your workflow state is persisted to Postgres).“

AASM gem is great too! Easy to use and actively maintained.

6. AASM

You can use state machine gems, such as aasm to write validation. But the gem introduces new DSL to write state transition. It's too much just for validation.