4 ms·
I didn't mean to give a bad impression of Ruby. I think (and many people have pointed out) that the problems I outline are valid for many developer communities,
by txus 14y ago
I didn't mean to give a bad impression of Ruby. I think (and many people have pointed out) that the problems I outline are valid for many developer communities, if not all of them. In the end, those communities are human, and share a good amount of our defects.
- sleight42 14y agoYou do the Ruby community that you seek to improve a disservice when you use a title that troll baitish. In fairness, you're not the only one I see doing this. There are many bloggers who use the same tactic. I have occasionally been guilty of this in the past though I cautiously avoid the practice now. More specifically, have you attended any regional Ruby conferences? It is almost certainly a community unto itself: those developers who take the time away from their jobs and families to attempt to better themselves by learning from others. The (Ruby) conference-going community is demonstrably better than at least two out of your three arguments. As for the Pareto principle, it seems unfair to paint the "Ruby community" with such a broad brush while then going on to say the same of the OSS community at large. It's a universal problem. It should not have been raised in the context of your post. Finally, you provided no constructive advice in your blog post. How was this post supposed to be helpful? I for one am tired of the negativity. This post, by providing only destructive criticism, ironically only serves to exacerbate the public image that some paint Rubyists with.
- txus 14y agoI am currently organizing the Barcelona Ruby Conference, and have attended many other conferences in Europe. I know a lot of people put much effort in doing things right. But that's not the majority of the community, unfortunately. I also agree that the Pareto principle (and many other points raised in my post) are a universal problem, not just Ruby's. I did provide constructive advice. If you read the post thoroughly, you can see a call to improve our learning manners, stay away from hot trends, and even a simple pattern you can use in your day to day to compare technologies, or to understand better some debates (like threads-processes-reactors).
- clivestaples 14y agoDid it really not occur to you that an overly-dramatic lament, with f-bombs and references to cancer, might give a bad impression? There is really very little excuse for Rubyists to have so little awareness, especially if they hope to overcome the stigma they are so worried about...
- txus 14y agoI'm really proud that so far no one has argued about any point I make in the article, but rather about the "cancer" reference and the swearing at the end. I guess that means I happened to write a pretty damn good article.
- knowtheory 14y agoOh I can oblige you there. Please, explain to me the difference between "following trends blindly" and "learning from older developers' experience"? Because both of them look remarkably like cargo-culting appeals to authority. Folks constantly rant about the reinvention of the wheel, but i think they're missing the point. Everyone talks about how wonderful it is that digital and web-based technologies allow for rapid prototyping and failing fast which in turn results in the ability to experiment. And then they turn around and criticize people for experimenting accusing them of not learning from their elders or whatever. Learning is a process. You learn by doing. Even if you have to rediscover what other folks have discovered in the past.
- txus 14y agoExperimenting is good. I do it all the time. Just take a look at my repos on Github. Just a few of them are conceptually (and arguably) "new", while the others are just exercises to learn about new things. Experimenting about things, even about the basic ones, helps me a lot in my learning process. At a personal level. But when you watch the bigger picture, with companies actually building software for clients that trust them, then choosing technology is a delicate, non-trivial matter. It's important, and I mean in actual dollars (or euros). There is where the expertise of older developers, people who have founded, sold or shut down profitable and unprofitable companies, who have worked in a gazilion of projects and made a lot of expensive mistakes, there is where that expertise comes to play. They can enlighten the sometimes childish, faction-like debates about technology that keep repeating themselves over and over. That can free us to think about new problems and new things, based on past experience. That's how science advances, and that's how software development advances too, in my opinion.