A lot of bitterness in that post, I guess for missing the hype train?
As if Java missed the hype train.
Oracle support in ActiveRecord is very poor. I don't know anyone who
would tell you otherwise. If he has decided ipso facto to go with
Oracle, then yes, Rails is not for him. But I don't know why he
complains about consultants making money from Rails and high
administration requirements, while at the same time using Oracle and
its armies of consultants and administrators. When Oracle decides that
there is money in Rails, they will release a nice driver, and then he
can happily continue giving them money.
There is certainly some opportunism in the publishing industry
surrounding Rails, but there is hardly a conspiracy, and really, what
do you expect? Something becomes popular and publishers ignore it out
of some kind of moral superiority?
The underscores thing makes no sense and suggests that he has barely
used Ruby himself, as do the complaints about caching.
I am very friendly to the idea of making Rails more enterprisey. It is
news to me though that it is "absolutely" enterprise ready. He needs
to cite sources.
My guess is that his team of J2EE developers wrote some Rails
applications exactly as if they were writing in a static language, as
well as realized too late that they should have evaluated the whole
stack at start time instead of blithely assuming that Oracle would be
a realistic choice because that's what all their J2EE apps use. Of
course then everything is going to seem terrible.
I used to be a Python person and have nothing against it. I am more
comfortable in Ruby, with its Perl-ly roots, however, than in Python,
so I don't use Django. I'm sure it is a fine piece of work.
talk mailing list