Web Development

Bill Ricker bill.n1vux at gmail.com
Tue Dec 9 02:10:21 GMT 2008

Perl has the (dis)advantage that there is more than one great
framework available, so TIMTOWTDI. Enterprise Architecture police
(like me) find this a problem, but Perl Mongers  (like me) find this a
strength. It does dilute the "Buzz", you hear about every small Rails
success but all the industrial Mason, Catalyst/Maypole, bespoke
TemplateToolkit, etc implementations just quietly work. With more
flexibility and less code.

Wish I could recommend the Perl frameworks at $DayJob -- but the
Highlander Rule "There can be only One" prevails. No one framework can
be agile,  lightweight, and all things to all people. (How's that J2EE
working out?) I can't lie that my one can, nor that Perl has only one.
Rails supporters can claim they can do anything they can imagine, but
I am not impressed.

Ruby is fine if Rails works for you. Rails is fine if you are willing
to let the GUI designer define your transactional DB schema. And
redefine it when they "improve" the "user experience" in 12 months,
and again, and again. Which means you need push-pull ETL tooling (or
Perl ) to flexibly connect this DB to your record keeping and
accounting systems. Rails looks great when you build a start up around
a fresh website, no legacy DB to preserve but reuse flexibly. Once the
VC's Auditors ask you about how your accounting data is updated from
sales, however...

n1vux at arrl.net bill.n1vux at gmail.com

More information about the Ubuntu-us-ma mailing list