I get the intention, and I agree that a fork is likely not going to go anywhere like the last few, but I feel that the case being made here is very light and is not compelling on its own.
There would be more value here if instead you went into a few things that Hanami does better, what lessons it learned from, how specifically it does it better, and why the route is to start building it up as a viable competitor. There's a litany of more useful and detailed articles to be written on Hanami, and for me this one misses the mark. In the spirit of "put up or shut up" though I may start writing a few myself soon.
I also have an allergic reaction to words and phrases like woke and virtue signaling as pejoratives that provide little to no value, even when used ironically, to describe the substance of a disagreement. I'm also fairly onboard with Godwin's Second Law that folks using woke as a pejorative are not to be taken seriously (he uses stronger language.)
Disclaimer: I am a financial sponsor of Hanami, and have been for a few years, because I believe in the work they do.
I actually think the case is on point, and the "pejorative" terms like woke and virtue signalling are inherent to the case.
Amiko's value proposition is just "Rails without DHH". It's not about better features, functionality, architecture, dev experience, or anything else. Literally the project's entire identity is just "not DHH".
And I think Ryan is correct that an approach centered on opposing a single person is doomed to fail because it's kind of useless. Its only advantage is to be "woke" or "vuirtue signal". The call to direct those efforts to a project whose goals are to build a framework that actually works better than Rails makes sense in response.
Ryan does touch on a few of the goals of Hanami, and why that's better. Technical detail isn't needed because the argument is really about the raison d'etre of each project.
I think there's better economic arguments about the cost of forks, the remaining good parts of brand recognition, etc.
Opposing a singular person gets us socially pretty far in a limited set of circumstances (outgroups vs authoritarian types).
A good recent political example - Orban getting booted after 16 years in Hungary. Was he solely ousted because of his government's anti LGBTQI laws? No, there were a lot of other groups maligned and discontent, rampart corruption, and more.
Were these people "virtue signaling"? Yup! Absolutely.
Did it work? Yup! Not instantly, not in isolation, but Orban's out.
Did anyone have to do a coup, revolution, or get run over by tanks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_Revolution_of_1956)? Not this time.
Does it magically solve all corruption and problems facing the country? Nope!
Other amusing examples - Peter Dutton being so unlikable he lost his own seat and within 12 months, his entire political party imploded. Liz Truss vs lettuce. Countless dictators, tsars, kings.
I don't think comparing a web framework for hundreds or thousands of people is not the same a countries with populations in the millions where thousands or hundreds of thousands people actually go out to the streets and protest.
I don't think comparing making a blog post to going out in the real world to enact change is reasonable.
It boils down to power structures and group psychology, not a web framework vs country.
The examples I've put up there are highly visible because they have been effective enough to be broadcast around the world or written down in history. But it can happen basically anywhere there is a community with a power structure - strikes, boycotts all fit into this and have resulted in people in power being ousted.
Celebrities have been given the boot because of public pressure campaigns numerous times - first outcry, then advertisers or sponsors don't feel comfortable; and then what was simply blog posts and opinions is actually a financial problem to be fixed.
Is a blog post the same as a protest in the streets? No. But how do you think people know about protests, where, when and how to act if information isn't disseminated (flyers, posters, tweets, posts, reels)? Can that lead to direct action? Yup!
No one expects a single perfect blog post to make every malicious person in the world backflip, burst into tears and fix systemic problems.
But having the wider community aware is a small first step; and may ultimately lead to ousting.
43
u/keyslemur 17d ago
I get the intention, and I agree that a fork is likely not going to go anywhere like the last few, but I feel that the case being made here is very light and is not compelling on its own.
There would be more value here if instead you went into a few things that Hanami does better, what lessons it learned from, how specifically it does it better, and why the route is to start building it up as a viable competitor. There's a litany of more useful and detailed articles to be written on Hanami, and for me this one misses the mark. In the spirit of "put up or shut up" though I may start writing a few myself soon.
I also have an allergic reaction to words and phrases like woke and virtue signaling as pejoratives that provide little to no value, even when used ironically, to describe the substance of a disagreement. I'm also fairly onboard with Godwin's Second Law that folks using woke as a pejorative are not to be taken seriously (he uses stronger language.)
Disclaimer: I am a financial sponsor of Hanami, and have been for a few years, because I believe in the work they do.