Hacker News Reader

Comment by roblabla | Hacker News Reader

While I haven't played with Sails.JS, I've heard many people complain about how bad it was. However, just because the people building this new framework used to work on the Sails.JS Framework, you're going to dismiss it as being "automatically bad" ? I didn't look at Trails.JS so I don't know how it looks, but this kind of attitude seems extremely toxic and detrimental to the Open Source space. It makes me sad this is the top comment.

If anything, this gives them the chance to start anew, equipped with the knowledge of past mistakes, to avoid making them again.

View on HN

Travis did not play a meaningful role in the development of Sails. He was a contributor for less than a year and made a total of 37 commits: https://github.com/balderdashy/sails/commits?author=tjwebb

That said, I wish Trails the best-- I just think it's important to point out information that is being misrepresented.

If you have any technical issues with Sails, I would appreciate hearing about those on GitHub.

In his defence, he is taking a stance equipped with the knowledge of his own personal past mistakes, to avoid making them again.

And his past mistake was using Sails.

If the implementation of the Sails as a Rails-like JS framework was as bad as he says, be shouldn't use it for his next project.

A bunch of members of the community apparently had similar thoughts. As long as the idea of Rails-like JS framework isn't fundamentally flawed, they seem to be doing the logical next step: make something better.

100% agree with you. I don't agree with the comment you replied to, but it's _not_ a good sign that they stole another project's logo. https://tent.io/

Hi bnb, it hurts to see the word "stole" and judgement passed so hastily, so I thought I'd take a quick second to reply.

It was only just this morning with the attention from Hacker News that we learned about the similarities between the two logos/brandmarks, and we're actively coming up with something new and different.

We'll keep the community posted on the status of the new designs here: https://github.com/trailsjs/trails/issues/47

Being open, compassionate, and transparent is a huge part of what we're hoping to do with Trails, so chatting with us directly is always an option.

We hope to see you on gitter!

All best :)

We've been in contact with the owner of tent, and are responding appropriately. Our logo unfortunately does bear a strong resemblance to theirs, which our designers are working to resolve.

I'd hitherto not heard of tent nor seen their logo, and neither had anyone else on our team. Saying that we "stole" it is fine for sloppy internet-talk, but it imbues your statement with a level of accusatory malice that we should try to avoid.

Can I dismiss it because it's like the 50th "modern MVC framework" to be made for Node.js? Are all the other ones so hopelessly broken that it required making an entirely new one?

Dismiss it, but you don't have to tell the entire world about your uninformed opinion. It's not as valuable as you suspect.

Opinion? Both sentences were questions. The first included a hyperbolic approximation (i.e. "50th") and the second included a legitimate direct question that infers an indirect question about the weird pace of churn and factionalization that seems to infect the Node.js community more than any other community.

If every other month a new thing was made, marketed, HN'd, and Twitter-culted that did basically the same thing as Nginx but had a slightly different config file format or shared-object handling mechanism or some other random detail I'd think that was also weird and somewhat superfluous.

It makes me wonder if building MVC frameworks has become so technically rote (time investment notwithstanding) that the simplicity of it has pushed them into Parkinson's Law of Triviality territory, such that everybody has their two-cents on how this weird metaprogramming trick is better than this other weird metaprogramming trick so now I can write my routes and handlers in this shape of quasi-DSL instead of that other quasi-DSL, and so then goes and makes a whole "new"... sorry... "modern" MVC framework.

How far away are we from realistically being able to replace the idiom, "bike-shedding" with, "MVC-frameworking"?

I'm just saying if you have a criticism share it. If your problem is being an nth iteration then that's not really comment worthy. Sure the node ecosystem has an abundance of modules and frameworks. I don't consider it harmful and it seems the developer mindshare sorts through these "problems" with ease.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com