On Dec 24, 2008, at 6:28 am, Anthony Green wrote:
> A little harsh. Plenty of Merb ideas have been feeding back into > Rails prior > to this. I consider myself to be just as opinionated as DHH, doesn't > mean I > can't be swayed by a passionately put and well argued case. Hmmm, such as since Merb slices, suddenly the Rails world loves Engines? And there's a difference between opinionated and dogmatic... > The way way merb core sees its so long as the values they hold are > encompassed in it who cares what its called ? That's just 'old world' > thinking. > > Rails has the larger feature set and the bigger user base. I still find it odd that a project that has grown so successfully and quickly on it's own needs to do this. (I don't think it does.) But as long as the Merb principles survive, I won't complain. >> what does the Merb core team have to gain from merging with >> Rails? > > A larger feature set and a bigger user base. > :-) Given time, I don't think either of these would have been issues. > Seriously reading the #merb discussions last night its obvious that > at the > heart its merb. Agnostic, modular and no alias_method_chain. > It can be as small as you like or as feature rich as you like. > Think of it as a win for common sense. :-) I truly hope this is the case, and that Merb will live on under the name Rails. Ashley -- http://www.patchspace.co.uk/ http://aviewfromafar.net/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "NWRUG" 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/nwrug-members?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
