[LRUG] What will the post-Rails contraction be ?

[Sam Livingston-Gray]

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 8:10 AM, Tom Stuart <tom at tomstuart.co.uk> wrote:
> There are some interesting ideas in here, but, given the number of
> unjustified leaps of logic and historical omissions, it's hard to see
> it as anything other than food for thought.

I suspect that's all it's intended to be.

> Particularly glaring: even
> if you accept everything that has gone before, *and* you accept that
> now is the time for 'contraction', why would you accept that that
> contraction will be one of GOOS or a 'functional revolution'?

I'm pretty sure Gary says *in the talk* that he's not arguing that
either of those will happen.  His description of Rails as a capability
expansion, and the growing backlash against the slightly smaller ball
of mud effect, certainly resonates with my own experience.  I took
those two scenarios as guesses.

Personally, I'm skeptical of a functional revolution because the
switching costs are relatively high, and there seem to be enough
palliative measures available (read: process concurrency) that I don't
see a critical mass building.  (But then, maybe I'm not looking in the
right places.)

And, I'm skeptical of GOOS winning because, despite the benefits that
style gives, it seems only to appeal to developers who care deeply
enough about their craft to put in the effort.  (I suppose that's just
another form of switching cost, though.)

Anyway:  thanks, OP!  I enjoyed the video, and then watched Gary's
"Boundaries" talk from RubyConf, which was also quite inspiring.

-Sam