Post AQX8ILYlMP9IZocfFg by postmodern@ruby.social
 (DIR) More posts by postmodern@ruby.social
 (DIR) Post #AQX8IFmMquSyeGwRcm by postmodern@ruby.social
       2022-12-11T17:02:13Z
       
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       Maybe part of the reason for Ruby's declining popularity numbers is that we've put all of our eggs in one basket, that is Rails. Come to think of it, there hasn't really been any new big [Open Source] Ruby frameworks with the exception of ROM and Hanami; I'll classify Sinatra and Padrino as micro-frameworks. Eventually users became increasingly disenchanted with Rails, Chef, Puppet, and Metasploit. Maybe what really drives programming language growth is new shiny frameworks/tools?#ruby
       
 (DIR) Post #AQX8IGrioULM1ASEbo by fredlinhares@cawfee.club
       2022-12-12T14:35:46.738225Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @postmodern Ruby on Rails is okay. However, we should do something else with Ruby that is not websites, like desktop applications and games.
       
 (DIR) Post #AQX8IID1okysBXQlSS by postmodern@ruby.social
       2022-12-11T19:07:25Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       Well, jekyll was almost a killer app for Ruby. It became popular really quickly as the go-to solution for static site generation, and GitHub used it for GitHub Pages. Jekyll ruined it's chances by becoming too complex, relying heavily on C extensions (which required a C compiler), adding extra features like SASS, SCSS, CoffeeScript, WebPack, etc, when the majority of people just wanted to make simple markdown+CSS websites. This contributed to Ruby's reputation as being complex and hard to setup.
       
 (DIR) Post #AQX8IJoHriNX9Ns2Ai by postmodern@ruby.social
       2022-12-11T19:15:07Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       If you search for Jekyll, you will find many examples of users complaining about Jekyll and how they perceived it to be too difficult to get installed/setup, and how they eventually switched to Hugo (Go) or Hyde (Python).* https://gohugo.io/* https://hyde.github.io/
       
 (DIR) Post #AQX8ILYlMP9IZocfFg by postmodern@ruby.social
       2022-12-11T19:18:21Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       Also note how Jekyll's installation instructions are far more complex than Hugo or Hyde. Hugo recommends installing from hugo from the package manager for Linux, and Hyde recommends installing it using pip. Meanwhile, Jekyll recommends you install via rubygems, but also mentions you need Ruby >= 2.5.0, GCC, and Make. Why doesn't Jekyll just tell users to install jekyll via `apt-get` or `dnf` like Hugo? Ubuntu and Fedora already have jekyll packaged, with all necessary external deps.
       
 (DIR) Post #AQX8INX41gyih7qKsi by postmodern@ruby.social
       2022-12-11T19:26:39Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       If you're distributing software for non-ruby-developers, your installation instructions should not be ruby-developer-centric where you tell users they need to install homebrew, then rbenv, then ruby-3.2.0, then ohmyzsh, etc. Instead consider these options:1. Create your own packages (PPA, Fedora COPR, Homebrew formula, or even a Snap image).2. Installation bash script which handles downloading, installing dependencies, building, configuring, etc.3. Copy/pasteable OS-specific install commands