dommer

Fair point. I'm sure he did enjoy them as well as their content being of notable worth.

I very much doubt the list, and the act of watching them is the whole lesson Spike is trying to impart. The lecture series would complete the educational message.

I'm not sure I said the list was created in isolation. The list if most valuable when taking with the film school lectures. Without the lectures I cannot be expected to understand why Spike add a particular file into the list. Therefore they are a list of films to watch recommended by a notable directory; of which there are many such lists.

The interruption of art is deceptive with nuance and esoteric means. Simply reading Shakespeare doesn't provide someone with understand of the proposed wisdom behind the text.

I think that was my point. As a reader of this list, it is of passing interest. Take the course this list accompanies and I will receive much better context and substantially improve my understanding of their inclusion.

You could say that. But the message—arguably—would be much better received with information.

The list has little value in isolation. A brief context about why a particular film is in the list would be much more helpful. The audience can then understand why he included "controversial" directors like Gibson.

The list on its own is just a list of films to watch that someone enjoyed...and everyone would most likely have a different list.

Perhaps SH was secretly the seller.

I never said they didn't work hard.

Yes this is a rant. However, the first point is a good one.

95% of the author's [limited sample] where recruiters earning a large amount of money for doing very little technically.

Have you tried to negotiate without a recruiter?

Many companies are now sharing some of the recruiter costs with the employee if they go direct. In London [currently] it is an employee market, so this is a simple and effective incentive.

Despite its four fundamental principles this framework does not read well and I personally wouldn't recommend it.

Class names with Ft or Bk or Rs or [add two letters] prefixes don't work for adoption and clarity of expression.

you can look at this list of Java awesomeness.

https://github.com/akullpp/awesome-java

Or other awesome stuff at the parent project.

https://github.com/sindresorhus/awesome

I'll skip the flame about WordPress developers as I don't know any, or, viewed their work.

If you think building micro service architecture can be done without consideration I'm lost for words.

The question–as I've been rightly reminded–was 'CRUD Web App in JVM'; furthermore, we now know that the domain part of the application is already done, so my comment is moot.

That just leaves CRUD, Web, and JVM.

I'm unsure about that and I think it depends greatly on what is the goal.

You can very easily do DI without Spring. (yes I know Spring is more than DI) As the project grows you can simple add Spring if brings 'real' value.

You can defer the choice of data store very late in a project without hinder its progress.

I'm not anti-framework/tooling, I just want to make sure it is required before I add it.

Most, if not all, frameworks require some specific bootstrapping/configuration that is extra to the job at hand.

fair comment. I will add though, spring, or hibernate, or play, or [pick your framework here] will also require reading.

My inclusion of these two reading resources were only meant as examples. The reader is still required to make their own mind up.

I haven't suggested astronaut architecture; the question didn't indicate the size/scale/importance either.

50% of the internet runs perfectly fine without consideration...wow! Have you looked at all the source code yourself to make such a ridiculous conclusion.

Tooling does matter, but I'm suggesting the point of focus to start with is the requirements.

I would not start with technology stack and build around them. You look at your use cases and build out. Pick your frameworks and databases judiciously and as late as possible.

Read: https://blog.8thlight.com/uncle-bob/2012/05/15/NODB.html

Read: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Growing-Object-Oriented-Software-Gui...

[EDIT] Removed the unnecessary/unhelpful opening statement.