5 ms·
I don't have much to say about any of the new functionality, but Spring seems like a very poor name for anything new related to programming.
by recursive 13y ago
I don't have much to say about any of the new functionality, but Spring seems like a very poor name for anything new related to programming.
- mountaineer 13y agoI agree with you, Spring is already well known in Java circles (and .NET to some extent).
- iagooar 13y agoAnd that's why it doesn't matter at all in the Ruby / Rails community ;)
- danielweber 13y agoAnd a nightmare for people in both the Java and Rails community when seeking jobs.
- r00fus 13y agoStill Google/search kind of flattens the namespace a bit. Now you're going to get lots and lots of Java Spring framework hits on any Ruby Spring google searches.
- midas007 13y agoSpring rails reloader gem. Solved.
- michh 13y agoExactly. Except they could have used Springloader or something as a shorthand for it (rather than Spring) and it wouldn't have been as much of an issue. It reminds me of when Wordpress gave one of their milestone releases the code-name Django. They actually changed it to "Rheinhardt" after the initial release because of the confusion it was causing. In this case it's even worse. Giving a component of a web framework the same name as a different, in a sense competing, framework is just plain silly.
- agotterer 13y agoAgreed. I'm a big Ruby fan, but some of the community naming choices are just annoying. In addition to spring: rack, sequel, devise, unicorn, faraday... I could keep going.