5 ms·
Am I the only one who read this as: tl;dr - don't get too far behind Rails, it's fucking painful and expensive if you do.
by hemancuso 12y ago
Am I the only one who read this as: tl;dr - don't get too far behind Rails, it's fucking painful and expensive if you do.
- brandonmenc 12y agoProbably any framework is painful to be two major versions behind with.
- tonyedgecombe 12y agoWhy would it be any more difficult to migrate from 2.3 to 3 now instead of four years ago?
- raus22 12y agotime == more code that can break
- davidw 12y agoI'm a big fan of Rails, but I think that Rails does not really give a lot of weight to backwards compatibility. The Ruby community in general often feels like it's always charging forward, very often with tons of cool new things, but occasionally leaving broken, incompatible software in its wake.
- yazaddaruvala 12y agoYou seem to imply there is something wrong with that.. As long as you bump the version number and support the old version for bug fixes, it ends up being the best way to move the world forward.
- davidw 12y agoI tried to keep my comment kind of neutral, actually. There are advantages and disadvantages, and the Ruby community does pretty well, by and large.
- ufmace 12y agoI am a fan of Rails and am doing some work on it, but it's pretty clear that while Rails is bumping version numbers cleanly, they aren't putting all that much work into supporting older versions. Github has been doing their own work backporting security patches to Rails 2.3 for years.