Slashdot Mirror


Ruby On Rails 5.0 Released (rubyonrails.org)

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+.

37 comments

  1. Really.... by quietwalker · · Score: 1, Insightful

    "It's incredible that this community is still going so strong after so long."

    I checked the Tiobe index 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%!

    1. Re:Really.... by Anonymous Coward · · 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.

    2. Re:Really.... by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 0

      "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!"

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    3. Re:Really.... by buddyglass · · Score: 2

      Unscientific tests:

      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.

    4. Re:Really.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is incredible is that you can't distinguish between a language and a framework.

  2. It's worse than Java EE these days. by Anonymous Coward · · 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".

    1. Re:It's worse than Java EE these days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Grandpa, are they letting you use the computer at the retirement home again?

    2. Re:It's worse than Java EE these days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The only thing we learn from history is that nobody ever learns anything from history.

    3. Re:It's worse than Java EE these days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

      That's because computing history began the first day of their freshman year.

    4. Re:It's worse than Java EE these days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

      Except that the real world is not black and white. For example, I agree on your Java/Ruby and RDBM/NoSQL mentions, but I disagree with the Rust one. In some things we might actually be improving.

    5. Re:It's worse than Java EE these days. by tripleevenfall · · Score: 4, 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.

    6. Re:It's worse than Java EE these days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, many millennial and hipster sorts working in the computing industry don't have college degrees, or even any college experience at all. Many are even high school dropouts. That's why they're always going on about how good they are despite being "self taught" or "autodidacts". Yet when confronted with the huge amount of common undergrad comp sci knowledge that they're totally ignorant about they tend to just attack anyone with a college degree. It's also why they say that the "worst code they've ever seen was written by somebody with a college degree", yet the reason it's the "worst code" they've seen is because they don't understand it. It turns out that this code is using more complex algorithms with better worst-case runtime complexity so that it scales better than the naive algorithms that the millennial and hipster types understand.

    7. Re:It's worse than Java EE these days. by PmanAce · · Score: 2

      How classy. You complain about him posting in a "cowardly" basis while you do the same. Golf clap.

      --
      Tired of my customary (Score:1)
    8. Re:It's worse than Java EE these days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And maybe hipsters will get real CS degrees, you know the one where you learn hard stuff like what big-O means, instead of doing a two week boot camp and magically becoming "software engineers".

      Unfortunately if that happens it also means pigs will fly and cause planes to crash. Oh well looks like we're stuck with Gnome 3 and systemd.

    9. Re: It's worse than Java EE these days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Such Hippocratic, much wow

    10. Re:It's worse than Java EE these days. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Is that your fixie out front that someone just pissed all over?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    11. Re:It's worse than Java EE these days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hello old fuck. You'll be a dead fuck sooner than the rest of us, all things being equal.

      I like that.

      Too bad. Some day you'll wake up and realize you don't understand how the world works, and there won't be anyone around to explain it to you.

    12. Re:It's worse than Java EE these days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      May I remind you that reducing the problem down to an age group is just silly? There are millenials trying to innovate, with mixed results. There are also millenials who are using established technologies. To me, that sounds pretty damn similar to any other age group.

    13. Re:It's worse than Java EE these days. by BlackPignouf · · Score: 1

      I agree with some of your points, I just would like to mention jRuby on Rails : https://github.com/jruby/jruby...
      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.

    14. Re:It's worse than Java EE these days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It has definitely been interesting watching the Rails community slowly reinvent the service layer after finally realizing that massive "fat models" were a mistake. It's kind of funny that Rails apps are now typically far more complicated than the average modern C# or Java web app that can serve 50 times the number of requests.

    15. Re:It's worse than Java EE these days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We've learned that penis in vagina feels good. That's about it. Roughly.

    16. Re: It's worse than Java EE these days. by untoreh+ · · Score: 1

      I don't think the point of nosql was to replace sql but to provide more granularity where needed...

  3. Shit on rails by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After six months polishing a turd, it's still a turd. You can't make it shine.

    1. Re:Shit on rails by HBI · · Score: 1
      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
  4. Rails is deja vu all over again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    Every few years a bright but not well-grounded-in-history programmer realizes he/she can query a database schema and generate a CRUD application.

    One of the earlier examples was Powerbuilder. But there have been many incarnations of the idea over the years. Even Java/Hibernate attempts to provide much of the functionality (yea, I know it's an ORM, but that doesn't make it suck any less).

    They all seem like a magic bullet to people who have never worked with one before, but they all share the same fatal flaw: a simple CRUD application is worthless, and once you start to modify the generated code you're locked into that version of the database schema. Maybe they've gotten better over the years, but it will never be as good as writing the application to do what you wanted in the first place.

    1. Re:Rails is deja vu all over again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they all share the same fatal flaw: a simple CRUD application is worthless, and once you start to modify the generated code you're locked into that version of the database schema.

      Last I used Rails (a long time ago, 1.2.x days), it did not generate (static) code for database schemas. The code was generated on-the-fly at runtime. You could of course override the generated methods, but any column changes did in fact copy over to the application.

    2. Re:Rails is deja vu all over again by jemmyw · · Score: 1

      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 built on what came before in it's problem space at just the right time to capture a wave of interest and to spread it's ideas to other platforms.

  5. uhoh by buddyglass · · Score: 1

    ...which means no more security patches for Rails 3.x, right?

    1. Re:uhoh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      3.x is ancient

      4.x is still getting security patches.

  6. Abandonware? by petes_PoV · · Score: 1

    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.

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
    1. Re:Abandonware? by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      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)!"

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    2. Re:Abandonware? by danielsfca2 · · Score: 1

      Oh come on. Rails 4 has been out for over 3 years ( http://weblog.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 those patches to other laggards!

  7. I always felt that it was a mis-match by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to use Ruby for this kind of project, given how slow Ruby is. If you can live with the ugliness of the C++ syntax, you could write a web-page as one of several CGI flavors and use it as an extension to Nginx or something, and have seamless and real-time updates with 1/100th the CPU load on the server.

  8. ActionCable is overrated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Faye works just fine and is completely separate from Rails processes.

    ActionCable also adds a fuckton of configuration where Faye config is very light and I have never needed Redis to use Faye.