Ruby On Rails 5.0 Released (rubyonrails.org) 37
steveb3210 writes: Today, Ruby On Rails released version 5.0.0 of the platform. Major new features include ActionCable which brings support for WebSockets and a slimmed-down API-only mode From the official blog post:After six months of polish, four betas, and two release candidates, Rails 5.0 is finally done! It's taken hundreds of contributors and thousands of commits to get here, but what a destination: Rails 5.0 is without a doubt the best, most complete version of Rails yet. It's incredible that this community is still going so strong after so long. Thanks to everyone who helped get us here. [...] Note: As per our maintenance policy, the release of Rails 5.0 will mean that bug fixes will only apply to 5.0.x, regular security issues to 5.0.x and 4.2.x, and severe security issues also to 5.0.x and 4.2.x (but when 5.1 drops, to 5.1.x, 5.0.x, and 4.2.x). This means 4.1.x and below will essentially be unsupported! Ruby 2.2.2+ is now also the only supported version of Rails 5.0+.
Really.... (Score:2, Insightful)
"It's incredible that this community is still going so strong after so long."
I checked the Tiobe index [tiobe.com] and I guess they're right, it IS on the rise. They're almost more popular than Visual Basic .Net, but they've got a ways to go to catch up to Perl.
To be fair though, they've more than doubled in popularity since a low in early 2015, going from sub 1% to over 2%!
Re: (Score:1)
The "community" in this context is the Ruby on Rails community, not the Ruby community.
The relative ranking of languages in the Tiobe index has little to do with the popularity of web development frameworks. For instance Python is ranked higher than Ruby, but for web development the number of job offerings (as one measure of popularity) requiring Ruby on Rails experience is larger than, say, Django.
Re: (Score:3)
careers.stackoverflow.com: Rails: 237. Django: 93. Python: 713. Ruby: 430.
indeed.com: Rails: 16,479. Django: 2,219. Python: 43,411. Ruby: 17,525.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes you're correct, and Rails is still like that. It figures out all the columns on boot (in production, on each page load in development). It has a separate migration system that allows you to modify the schema.
I developed on Rails for a few years. I'm not fond of using it now but I recognize it for what it is/was, a product of it's time. It made developing database backed web applications much faster and easier than Java or .NET at the time, and more structured than PHP. Nothing in software is new, but it
Re: (Score:1)
"Rails 5.0 is without a doubt the best, most complete version of Rails yet."
And yet it's still a dreadful, bloated, pokey sack of nuts and bolts that have to be stuck together with Unicorn Glue.
"Bug fixes for older versions? Fuck you, because, umm, fuck you!"
It's worse than Java EE these days. (Score:4, Interesting)
I find it hilarious how so much of Rails' initial popularity because it wasn't riddled with design patterns and the bloat of Java EE. But here we are, a decade later, and Ruby on Rails has somehow managed to surpass Java EE in terms of complexity, patterns, best practices, and all of that!
It's interesting to note that the same thing is happening with Rust. It's supposed to be better than C++, but somehow Rust ends up having a worse syntax, a worse standard library, a worse community, only one kinda-shitty implementation, godawful semantics, and a worse learning curve!
It's also interesting to note that it's the same with NoSQL databases. They're supposedly better than relational databases, but then those who choose to use them end up trying to reimplement basic RDBMS functionality like transactions and foreign keys using Ruby or JavaScript! Instead of using a dedicated and proven query language like SQL, they try to imitate SQL using JavaScript!
It's like Millennials/Hipsters haven't even tried to learn from the decades of experience that we acquired before they showed up. They're so sure that they're right, despite being completely wrong, that they ignore the proper way of doing things and instead do everything wrong.
I still have some hope for the next generation, though. Maybe they will be smart enough to realize how shitty the work of the Millennials/Hipsters has been, and they'll throw it all away and go back to using real, proven programming languages, frameworks and database systems, even if these proven technologies aren't "trendy" or "pretty".
Re: (Score:1)
Grandpa, are they letting you use the computer at the retirement home again?
Re:It's worse than Java EE these days. (Score:5, Insightful)
No, he's been coaxed out of retirement and into consulting by a headhunter, who's looking for someone to fix garbage code that FreshBSinCompSci wrote.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Is that your fixie out front that someone just pissed all over?
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with some of your points, I just would like to mention jRuby on Rails : https://github.com/jruby/jruby... [github.com]
You can cherry pick what you want and what you consider good from the Java/Ruby/Ruby on Rails worlds.
It's very interesting to see how it's written, it's pretty stable, fast, and you can get very useful web-services out of tried and true jar files in no time.
Re: It's worse than Java EE these days. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
uhoh (Score:2)
Abandonware? (Score:2)
Note: As per our maintenance policy, the release of Rails 5.0 will mean that bug fixes will only apply to 5.0.x
So all you have to do when you get too many bugs is to just roll a new release and magically your support obligations disappear. Excellent plan.
Re: (Score:2)
So all you have to do when you get too many bugs is to just roll a new release and magically your support obligations disappear. Excellent plan.
It's brilliant. It also sucks, but it's brilliant suckage, so hey just web-scale it, flip the paradigm, and order some more Mountain Dew.
In other words, "We don't support all that other dreadful shit we just released, so move to our new Awesome Extreme Version(tm)!"
Re: (Score:2)
Oh come on. Rails 4 has been out for over 3 years ( http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/... [rubyonrails.org] ) not counting beta versions. If you haven't been bothered to update your public-facing application to 4.x in 3 years then yes, you're on your own. If you were one of the volunteers donating your time to run the Rails project would you want to support every version forever? You can always feel free to pay a developer yourself to fix any security holes that may turn up in Rails 3 in the future. And heck, you could sell thos