Live data from Hacker News

"Getting started with Ember.Js is easy." - No it isn't

discuss.emberjs.com

231–240 of 252 posts

Re: "Getting started with Ember.Js is easy." - No it isn't

#231

With all the time and frustration needed to learn Ember just do it with Backbone

This was pretty much my pathway to developing my current app on Backbone. I think Backbone hits the sweet spot in terms of abstraction needed to structure an application in a maintainable way (and plays pretty nicely with require.js, which buys you a much better ability to break your app apart)

Re: "Getting started with Ember.Js is easy." - No it isn't

#232
post #80

I totally agree that our getting started story could be much better. In fact, it's our primary focus as we move towards 1.0. Specifically: * We're actively working on a Getting Started Guide with live examples that walks the user through building a new application from scratch. * We're continuing to improve our guides to talk through areas that might be confusing for new developers, like the naming conventions[1] we…

One thing I'm a big fan of is when projects have an always updated always working "Hello World" sample included with their project. This is something I've found to be common with iOS libraries and I think it would be helpful for you guys. It's nice to be able to take a look at something that works and is simple enough to read through in one glance and go "Ah hah!"

If only Apple did the same for OSX, its getting better, but theres still tons of examples that dont compile w/o several warnings, and usually haven't been converted to ARC.

Re: "Getting started with Ember.Js is easy." - No it isn't

#233
post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You got feedback from a frustrated user, and I'm sure you didn't just dismiss it internally, so why did you dismiss it externally? Listen, I'd love to be able to write what I want, teach what I want, and do what I want without getting sarcastic reviews. But unfortunately people get frustrated and that's how they respond. "Oh, a tmux book? Who needs that?" "You suck" is very, very different from "the thing you built s…

In any other venue, I would 100% agree and would not have responded this way. Delvarworld's tone is totally mild and in keeping with typical internet culture. But Discourse's goal is to raise the bar. Significantly. They blog rather eloquently about it http://blog.discourse.org/2013/03/the-universal-rules-of-civ... And new topic posters are asked to keep that high standard in mind when posting. I'm sure his sarcasm w…

"I'm sure his sarcasm was meant lightly, but it still deviates from the high quality of discussion I'd like to have"

Sarcasm and quality of discussion are orthogonal. It's very easy to have 100% "civil" discourse that is of absolutely no quality, and the only difficulty in having high-quality sarcastic discourse is the difficulty inherent in having high-quality discourse sans phrase.

Civility is a purely formal virtue (the virtue, in fact, of specious op-ed pages, where the only discursive sin is an uncivil tone), and it's far too common (one sees this in political discourse especially) for "lack of civility" or "uncivil tone" to be used to exclude people who are, often justifiably, frustrated or passionate about the topic at hand. It is of course possible for someone to be so relentlessly rude that there's no point in further (nb further!) engagement with them, but that clearly isn't the case here. It looks, to be honest, as if you're indulging in the first plausible excuse to avoid engaging with the problem the poster raised---and, what's worse, pretending, as you do so, that your hands are tied.

There is really no reason why all complaints or issues raised should be couched in a hands-off, disinterested tone. (Or rather, the only reason that all complaints or issues should be so couched is that normatively bad but instrumentally unfortunately good reason that otherwise people will take your tone as an excuse not to engage.) You're doing yourself no favors by getting on this particular high horse.

Re: "Getting started with Ember.Js is easy." - No it isn't

#234
post #172
post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't help but feel that you're doing an excellent job of proving that a single short, civil post can do more damage to the community than any amount of slight sarcasm. If "absolute civility at all costs" is the basis for Discourse, I'd much rather try to have high quality discussions elsewhere. Edit: The link you provided has "responding to a post’s tone instead of its actual content" as part of a list of things t…

Which is why I opted to say "I'm sorry, I cannot respond".

And yet of course you could have responded. You could in fact have simultaneously pointed out that you find the tone of the original post unfortunate and then also addressed the substantive issues raised therein. "I can't respond" is ludicrous bad faith. Nothing is stopping you.

Re: "Getting started with Ember.Js is easy." - No it isn't

#235
post #78

Trek is making a huge mistake IMHO. As a developer I can think of nothing more helpful than to get a "steam-of-consciousness" excerpt from our users. This is something no analytics package can tell you, if you want to make your "product" easy to use then this is the exact feedback you need. Delverworld was outlining the various pitfalls of getting started with ember.js and a core contributor shrugs it off because he…

I have admitted that, publicly, very often, in other topics on discuss.emberjs.com, on websites, on twitter, on videos, and elsewhere. It's no secret I'd like to improve the documentation for Ember.js and I'm already well aware of the places that people are facing difficulty right now. There's work, if people spent a moment reading the top topics in the forum, on a getting started guide with a direct call for feedbac…

Ultimately, the Discourse OP just wants a better guide. Would someone with a Discourse account be willing to rephrase the OP's issue with less sarcasm?

Re: "Getting started with Ember.Js is easy." - No it isn't

#236
With my due respect to guys behind Ember, I don't understand why Ember gets so much attention. It has been in works for 4~5 years now but has not reached its 1.0 status. I've seen many complaints about its learning curve, documentation etc. However, when people talk about Javascript web frameworks to learn, it is often brought up as a candidate. Maybe someone can tell me why people think it will be a serious contender in this fast moving area.

Re: "Getting started with Ember.Js is easy." - No it isn't

#237
post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have admitted that, publicly, very often, in other topics on discuss.emberjs.com, on websites, on twitter, on videos, and elsewhere. It's no secret I'd like to improve the documentation for Ember.js and I'm already well aware of the places that people are facing difficulty right now. There's work, if people spent a moment reading the top topics in the forum, on a getting started guide with a direct call for feedbac…

So, here's the challenge: if you're going to develop systems software (which is to say, software that is consumed by a fellow software engineer), you're going to find that you're much more likely to hear about how the software doesn't work than how it does. This is frustrating because you -- like every other human -- react much better to praise than to scorn. But here's the leap you need to make: when you have someon…

When I fail to learn a new technology, I prefer to say the technology sucks than to say I'm too stupid to learn it. In this case, I do not really want them to success...

Re: "Getting started with Ember.Js is easy." - No it isn't

#238
post #78

Trek is making a huge mistake IMHO. As a developer I can think of nothing more helpful than to get a "steam-of-consciousness" excerpt from our users. This is something no analytics package can tell you, if you want to make your "product" easy to use then this is the exact feedback you need. Delverworld was outlining the various pitfalls of getting started with ember.js and a core contributor shrugs it off because he…

I have admitted that, publicly, very often, in other topics on discuss.emberjs.com, on websites, on twitter, on videos, and elsewhere. It's no secret I'd like to improve the documentation for Ember.js and I'm already well aware of the places that people are facing difficulty right now. There's work, if people spent a moment reading the top topics in the forum, on a getting started guide with a direct call for feedbac…

> Delvarworld's tone strayed into territory I don't think remains civil

> violates community norms I'd like to uphold

> I don't feel that I can be helpful when people approach with sarcasm

> places like hackernews, where a playful, sometimes discouraging culture of dickitude is acceptable and encouraged

You definitely have the most ridiculously uptight worldview of anyone I've ever met. If you're expecting any more than a tiny fraction of the people who adopt Discourse to come anywhere near your norms of "civilized discourse," then you must not be very familiar with the interwebs.

Re: "Getting started with Ember.Js is easy." - No it isn't

#239

It really is not easy. I really want to like Ember, I really do. But I also gave up after being unable to wrap my head around it. I read the official documentation, which is well written, but does not cover the big picture needed to tie everything together. I watched the peepcode screencast, which is great, even if for me the pace could have been a bit faster. After that I was convinced I wanted to give Ember a shot.…

I've been trying to put together a basic demo project that seems to do most of the things you're asking about: https://github.com/benburton/trakio

Hopefully it can be of use!

Post reply on HN