Did a simple test to evaluate: Make a simple note taking app with user auth and sprinkle in a React component. Took me half an hour to have the basic functionality in place. So far I haven't seen any framework with Rail's level of productivity.
If you like learning from book, I can recommend this one: https://pragprog.com/book/wwgraphql/craft-graphql-apis-in-el...
In my experience if you have a developer of any experience level go through the full Rails tutorial they come out on the other side highly productive. I usually have people on my team do this on their own time and they usually finish within the first two weeks of work.
What I will say is that the implicit, convention over configuration approach of rails means you really do have to RTFM. I find that the more experienced a developer is the more resistant they tend to be to this. But in general they all get over it after they read the manual.
And there you have it. Most devs I have ever worked with hardly read docs beyond as reference material.
To be fair, effective documentation (beyond just api reference) is hard and time consuming. I have a lot of respect for the projects that have documentation _worth_ reading.
Other responders on this thread think I’m saying Rails isn’t productive or easy to learn, I’m not. I’m saying there is a higher bar for the minimum amount of knowledge you need to comprehend the flow of control in a Rails app.
And if you are so unlucky as to inherit such a project it is anything but straightforward. It's like trying to deschiffer the mind of some alien creature, i.e. former developer.
Pretty easy to set up, quite simple and open source.
Real question, because introducing another dependency like elastic over postgresql seems overkill.
Something even better would be using Vesper, the search engine from Yahoo, that would definitely be overkill.
>Let's continue to compress the concepts
that are worth keeping, reject the ones that aren't,
broaden the base of people who can actually have
a chance to write this software that's eating the world,
such that the software that we end up with
is software the benefits the world.
I think that's what's interesting - reducing the technical complexity to allow more focus on building things that are interesting in the real world.
Project appears stale, unless someone else has picked up the development.
Whenever I read "Ruby on Rails", I can't help but think back to when it was the latest fad and everyone was playing with it, but then every single project would break whenever any of the 82 dependencies needed to be updated due to security issues.
Since this site has no details, I've lost interest since I have no intention of revisiting that shitshow without someone telling me it's somehow different, that the dependency nightmare is now fixed. Pretty or not, projects which require significant energy to just keep up with security updates aren't worth it.