I had, of course, asked David Heinemeier Hansson to react to the shortcomings that Avi Bryant identified in Rails in my interview with him. Here is what David said:
Most any system could be designed around stateful components. It’s more of an architectural choice rather than a specific requirement.
I’m happy to see Avi challenge the established thinking of the web development community. I’m not feeling the pain of the missing stateful components in Rails, but he obviously does, which is part of why there is Seaside. Which is great. I don’t feel the need to go into a ping-pong over it.
That quote did not make it into the final cut of the interview because it would have been a stretch to cast the two different architectural approaches to application development as some rivalry between David and Avi. Clearly that was not the case. Plus, you know, it was a pretty tepid quote, so there was nowhere to go with it.
Unfortunately, the InfoQ article about the interview did go there. So I was glad to see David respond at length to clarify his position and re-affirm that not only are he and Avi not rivals, but that Seaside is a fascinating framework and a worthy focus of some attention.
Seaside and Rails are both high-visibility web frameworks that take very different paths in their execution. Contrasting the two to learn more is a great way to higher insight…I’m much more interested in what I can learn from Seaside than just about any other framework out there.
Obviously, I could hardly agree more.
Avi posted some kind words about the interview on his blog, and in regard to the dust-up said, “this is what differing opinions combined with mutual respect looks like, folks.”
Aww…can you feel the love? Can ya?