I did not read DHH's post and think he was suggesting Mongrel was leaking. I see that DHH screwed up and said Mongrel (which they were using in production, just not on Basecamp) when he should have said FCGI. But Zed has taken an entire DHH post, zoomed in on one irrelevant error, and attempted to twist the entire discussion around it. Let's settle it now: * Mongrel wasn't leaking. * DHH clearly appears to have missp…
Zed Shaw responds to DHH's Ruby Myths
11–20 of 61 posts
Re: Zed Shaw responds to DHH's Ruby Myths
#12I did not read DHH's post and think he was suggesting Mongrel was leaking. I see that DHH screwed up and said Mongrel (which they were using in production, just not on Basecamp) when he should have said FCGI. But Zed has taken an entire DHH post, zoomed in on one irrelevant error, and attempted to twist the entire discussion around it. Let's settle it now: * Mongrel wasn't leaking. * DHH clearly appears to have missp…
Re: Zed Shaw responds to DHH's Ruby Myths
#13The reason I think this is interesting, though, is because this behavior apparently rubs off on Rails users. I know someone who switched from Perl to Ruby (on Rails) a while back. He came back to the Perl community by writing his own super-great web framework. When anyone gives it any technical criticism, he immediately replies with something like "I had a friend like you. I hope you get help and get better." blood pressure rising
In conclusion, everyone that uses Rails is mentally ill :)
Re: Zed Shaw responds to DHH's Ruby Myths
#14Wow! Zed's story is consistent and potentially damning. I look forward to DHH's reply.
Be more specific about why Zed's post is "damning".
Memory leaks in Mongrel that were fixed in 2006 are the at the center of DHH's argument that RoR crashes are ancient history. Yet Zed shows that the application DHH is referring to that previously needed to be restarted 400 times a day wasn't even running on Mongrel.
Re: Zed Shaw responds to DHH's Ruby Myths
#15"Mom, DHH called me a stupid-head!" "Did not!" "Did so!" ... Etc., etc. Honestly, neither of these guys need us feeding their egos. They've contributed some decent infrastructure for web hacking, but if they want to have a he-said/she-said argument, that's their business. I personally don't want to waste any more time on their little ego-fest. Let's turn this into a thread about Passenger, instead, since both of them…
Re: Zed Shaw responds to DHH's Ruby Myths
#16"Mom, DHH called me a stupid-head!" "Did not!" "Did so!" ... Etc., etc. Honestly, neither of these guys need us feeding their egos. They've contributed some decent infrastructure for web hacking, but if they want to have a he-said/she-said argument, that's their business. I personally don't want to waste any more time on their little ego-fest. Let's turn this into a thread about Passenger, instead, since both of them…
I hear it's possible to install it on a spare box and see if it works with your rewrite rules or not. Let's call it "testing".
Re: Zed Shaw responds to DHH's Ruby Myths
#17I did not read DHH's post and think he was suggesting Mongrel was leaking. I see that DHH screwed up and said Mongrel (which they were using in production, just not on Basecamp) when he should have said FCGI. But Zed has taken an entire DHH post, zoomed in on one irrelevant error, and attempted to twist the entire discussion around it. Let's settle it now: * Mongrel wasn't leaking. * DHH clearly appears to have missp…
Zed may very well be paranoid, hyper-aggressive and caustic. However, you can be paranoid and on to something. The subtle forms of aggression that Zed accuses the Rails core of perpetuating are difficult to provide concrete examples for, and it seems as though he has done just in this case.. we will see how it plays out. It impacts me as a developer because this potentially diminishes DHH's credibility in my eyes, an…
Well, all the code is available, right? You should base your decisions on the design and implementation of Rails, not on one of the author's blog. This is a really scary pattern emerging that I've noticed. It seems like people want to base their infrastructure decisions on things that don't matter. "Well, I would use $foo, but the website doesn't look very nice." "$foo seems nice, but the main author can be mean." If this is how you make IT decisions, I pity you.
(A while back, someone posted to my blog a comment that read, "Because you were so mean on CPAN Ratings, I've suggested to my clients that they use PHP instead of Catalyst." That doesn't seem like a very sound way of evaluating infrastructure decisions, especially since I am not the author of Catalyst. If they want to make more work for themselves because they don't like me, all I can do is point and laugh. Clearly I'm mentally ill, though.)
Re: Zed Shaw responds to DHH's Ruby Myths
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
Zed may very well be paranoid, hyper-aggressive and caustic. However, you can be paranoid and on to something. The subtle forms of aggression that Zed accuses the Rails core of perpetuating are difficult to provide concrete examples for, and it seems as though he has done just in this case.. we will see how it plays out. It impacts me as a developer because this potentially diminishes DHH's credibility in my eyes, an…
It impacts me as a developer because this potentially diminishes DHH's credibility in my eyes, and as the Rails BDFL, this has the potential to impact how I approach the platform I use to make a living. Well, all the code is available, right? You should base your decisions on the design and implementation of Rails, not on one of the author's blog. This is a really scary pattern emerging that I've noticed. It seems li…
I can stare at the code all I want and still be no closer to knowing how rails performs under load, or how much memory it leaks. That isn't just about the code, it's about behavioral interactions with the OS, level of traffic, other layers in the stack. To address those issues I could run a million performance evaluation experiments, or I could try to gauge how the community is doing, who's using it that is kinda in the same situation as me, and what issue's they're dealing with. And I refuse to believe you don't do the same.
He's not talking about what words DHH uses in a blog. He's talking about DHH's credibility in saying rails was production-ready. That is relevant to platform choices.
Re: Zed Shaw responds to DHH's Ruby Myths
#19I did not read DHH's post and think he was suggesting Mongrel was leaking. I see that DHH screwed up and said Mongrel (which they were using in production, just not on Basecamp) when he should have said FCGI. But Zed has taken an entire DHH post, zoomed in on one irrelevant error, and attempted to twist the entire discussion around it. Let's settle it now: * Mongrel wasn't leaking. * DHH clearly appears to have missp…
Zed may very well be paranoid, hyper-aggressive and caustic. However, you can be paranoid and on to something. The subtle forms of aggression that Zed accuses the Rails core of perpetuating are difficult to provide concrete examples for, and it seems as though he has done just in this case.. we will see how it plays out. It impacts me as a developer because this potentially diminishes DHH's credibility in my eyes, an…
Re: Zed Shaw responds to DHH's Ruby Myths
#20I've noticed a pattern emerging in the Ruby community. Everyone thinks everyone else "needs help". Zed "needs help". Zed's friend "might need help". The reason I think this is interesting, though, is because this behavior apparently rubs off on Rails users. I know someone who switched from Perl to Ruby (on Rails) a while back. He came back to the Perl community by writing his own super-great web framework. When anyon…