before rails, i've been developing in a non-optionated environment for a bit more than 10 years. both non-optionated way and the optionated way has its advantages, but in my personal experience i prefer the optionated way. as far as i know, merb follows a non-optionated philosophy and the merge between rails and merb will open a window for rails to be a bit more non-optionated ...
well, probably after the merge we will have at least 2 options to choose: the traditional rails way and the new rails_merb way. well, 2 possibilities means that if one work in a company using the traditional way and then move to a company using another way then a paradigm barrier will appear ... before rails i did a lot of .NET development and i worked for a couple of different companies and each one of them using different ideas working with the same framework which is really a BAD thing imho specially for us: developers and architects ... .NET development is a nightmare and so is JAVA ... but this is not the point here.
merb is fast, light, deals better with memory and etc, but i believe the rails guys could fix it in rails without a merb merge ... but since the merge is officially anounced i truly hope and wish the best for both rails and merb communities but i wouldn't be surprised if another 'merb type' framework appears in the future and hope to rails 3.0 and up to not become a really bloated framework, the one that we developers really hate to work with. :-)
Last edited by sohdubom (2008-12-28 09:20:41)