You won't see me calling Merb "dead". It was reasonably stable in the 1.0.x series, and 1.1 keeps it up to date enough to run with modern Ruby libraries. If you want to understand the relative activity of different frameworks, I'd take a look at the day-to-day commits.
Yehuda Katz Architect | Engine Yard (ph) 718.877.1325 On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Nicholas Orr <[email protected]>wrote: > On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 9:26 AM, Dan Sosedov <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> But still, im not sure how long will Merb be on the fly. If you ask >> most of Rails developers about Merb - they`ll say its a dead >> framework. I can disagree with that. I think it should find its own >> way, not be in shadows of Rails (which borrowed a lot of good things >> from Merb). >> > > It is easy to say something is dead, just ask them why and see if they > actually can describe why its dead :) > > Merb is alive, it works... > Its not like it is in a proof of concept stage, you can go DM+Merb and have > a functioning app > > That's good enough for me ;) > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "merb" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected] <merb%[email protected]>. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/merb?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "merb" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/merb?hl=en.
