mhartl

27 ms·

1. 241.▲
   by mhartl 12y ago

   I don't like "outing" people, in case they didn't want their presence at an event to be widely known I understand where you're coming from, but in the present context this is consideration bordering on madness. Tr
2. 242.▲
   by mhartl 12y ago

   Twitpic's unfortunate fate is a reminder that your company hasn't been acquired until the money is in the bank. As pg put it, "Deals fall through" [1]: Startup founders tend to be optimistic. This can work well in techn
3. 243.▲
   by mhartl 12y ago

   The MOBI version looks good on a Kindle, but I prefer the PDF on iPad because the PDF is print-quality. (This is due to limitations of the MOBI format and is not specific to the Ruby on Rails Tutorial .)
4. 244.▲
   by mhartl 12y ago

   Thanks for the question. MySQL actually hasn't been the default for a while, I think back before Rails 2.0. The default database for testing and development now is SQLite; in production, the tutorial uses PostgreSQL at Heroku. I recomm
5. 245.▲
   by mhartl 12y ago

   Thanks for the kind words, and glad you like the new approach!
6. 246.▲
   by mhartl 12y ago

   Thanks, happy to hear it!
7. 247.▲
   by mhartl 12y ago

   Thanks for the question. As noted [here]( https://www.railstutorial.org/#print-edition ), the print edition will be published by Addison-Wesley and is due out in Spring 2015. If you don't want to wait for that, I recomme
8. 248.▲
   by mhartl 12y ago

   There was a hiccup with our Redis provider. Should be working now.
9. 249.▲
   by mhartl 12y ago

   I feel like Agile assumes you basically know web development. It has lots of great material, but it's not structured to build up from zero, so I think the Rails Tutorial is probably a better place to start for most people.
10. 250.▲
    by mhartl 12y ago

    Yup, that's it! I make it a policy to keep all the old versions online, as you can see here: https://www.railstutorial.org/#previous-versions
11. 251.▲
    by mhartl 12y ago

    I'm not sure, but probably within a couple of months. I don't how much work the publisher is going to have to do to put it in their format.
12. 252.▲
    by mhartl 12y ago

    You were one of the first people I told about this idea (something like five years ago), and were one of the tutorial's earliest and most enthusiastic supporters. It's pretty cool to see how it's all come together!
13. 253.▲
    by mhartl 12y ago

    Thanks so much for the kind words! I really appreciate it.
14. 254.▲
    by mhartl 12y ago

    Wow, thanks! If you might be willing to let me use some of this for a testimonial on the site, please shoot me an email at admin at railstutorial dot org. (That goes for the other commenters on this story as well. Thanks to all of you for t
15. 255.▲
    by mhartl 12y ago

    Thanks! I actually made a VM using Vagrant when scoping out the 3rd edition, but getting everything to work cross-platform was almost as much trouble as just installing things natively. That's why I ended up going with the cloud IDE. B
16. 256.▲
    by mhartl 12y ago

    You're absolutely right. Please see my comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8461583 .
17. 257.▲
    by mhartl 12y ago

    I appreciate your support, but minimaxir is actually right. This was news to me, and I've been a member of Hacker News for 2768 days. It's in the FAQ, not the guidelines, which is why I missed it: https://news.ycombinat
18. 258.▲
    by mhartl 12y ago

    You're welcome! Happy to hear it. :-)
19. 259.▲
    by mhartl 12y ago

    Awesome, glad to hear it!
20. 260.▲
    by mhartl 12y ago

    I'm really excited about this 3rd edition of the Ruby on Rails Tutorial , which is a huge update touching every chapter in the book (and adding an all-new chapter as well). I'm planning on hanging out at Hacker News for a bit pos
21. 261.▲
    Launch of the 3rd Edition of the Ruby on Rails Tutorial Book(news.railstutorial.org)

    254 points by mhartl 12y ago|65 comments
22. 262.▲
    by mhartl 12y ago

    misleading or linkbait titles. This one is obviously the latter. It's not obvious to me. The title is a play on words; to the extent that it misleads, it does so for effect. And not all cleverness is tantamount to linkbait. (For what
23. 263.▲
    by mhartl 12y ago

    The subject of the piece (Stephen Booth) has written "400 pages of virtuosic commentary exploring the ambiguity and polysemy of Shakespeare’s verse." Does anyone know if he addresses Step Zero of appreciating the sonnets, which is
24. 264.▲
    by mhartl 12y ago

    Yes, it's true: http://allthingsd.com/20091005/new-yorker-bezos-initial-goog...
25. 265.▲
    by mhartl 12y ago

    Awesome, glad to hear it!
26. 266.▲
    by mhartl 12y ago

    LOL. My first thought was, "That's kind of a dick comment." My second thought was, "Oh, it must be tptacek himself." :-)
27. 267.▲
    by mhartl 12y ago

    You can still use "entrepreneur", which comes from same root as "enterprise" (ultimately from Middle French entreprendre , "to undertake"). entrepreneur noun, plural entrepreneurs 1. a person wh
28. 268.▲
    by mhartl 12y ago

    Everyone knows that Jobs didn't start Pixar Evidently at least one person didn't know that, because my comment was written in response to someone who wrote that Jobs "also started Pixar". If the commenter had written
29. 269.▲
    by mhartl 12y ago

    It's impressive, to be sure, but Jobs didn't start Pixar—he essentially bought it from Lucasfilm. [1] [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixar#Early_history
30. 270.▲
    by mhartl 12y ago

    I share pg's distaste for the mouthful that is "entrepreneurship" ( http://youtu.be/ii1jcLg-eIQ?t=30m35s ). How about resurrecting the root, and using "enterprise" instead? Moving a language as big as