From: Mark Volkmann Date: 2005-08-16T08:46:06+09:00 Subject: Re: comp.lang.ruby FAQ On 8/15/05, Ben Giddings wrote: > On Monday 15 August 2005 17:40, Austin Ziegler wrote: > > I disagree. Rails may be the first FAQ, but there is the occasional > > question about "other frameworks." The comp.lang.ruby FAQ shouldn't > > become Yet Another Advertisement for Rails. > > It's not meant to be an ad though, it's supposed to answer frequently asked > questions. We get frequent questions about Rails (a few every week) but > almost none about other frameworks. I have no objection at all to > mentioning other frameworks, even in the Rails answer, but let's keep the > purpose of the document in mind. A FAQ exists so that the same questions > aren't asked over and over, and the questions being asked are almost all > about Rails, not about Nitro, Wee, Hobix, Typo, or any other web-related > app. > > So, what about this for FAQs and answers? > > 4. Web applications in Ruby > 4.1 How can I get help with my Rails questions? > 4.2 Are there other web applications in Ruby? > > The answer to 4.1 can point them to the Rails mailing lists, docs sites, > the rails book, etc. > > The answer to 4.2 can summarize all the other web apps. > > Sure, this gives Rails more prominence than the other frameworks, but this > just reflects reality, and the reality is that there are far more Rails > questions than there are Nitro questions. > > Sound fair? This seems fair to me. -- R. Mark Volkmann Partner, Object Computing, Inc.