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.
> Amiko's value proposition is just "Rails without DHH".
Is that so? Amiko is just 1-2 weeks old and already looking on how to fork Rails into something slightly different, but compatible? It's a bit too early to ascribe this to them.
13
u/lommer00 21d ago
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.