Well, that's the point. We're talking about rails 4 here. It's a mature framework at this point, and yet apparently here is the DFL saying that people who historically have had no problems running Rails are now - without warning - deemed to have made a mistake.
Thats why Im always wary of programmers who join into a framework too quickly.
How long should a framework be given, then? Or is your point that anyone who picked Rails made a mistake precisely because it's an opinionated framework, and they aren't a DHH/37S clone?
Rails culture has always been about change. There is focus on backwards compatibility but its not job #1. If you can't change along with Rails, then you should not use it. DHH can do as he pleases because thats his framework. It powers his business. If he needs to change anything to fit his needs, then he will do so. Thats the culture of Rails.
I use Rails, and its a nice framework. But I'm not a fanboy. Its just another tool for the job. Just like Django, Symfony, Flask, Sinatra, Laravel, Slim, etc.
Now, I'm not getting into a pissing match with you. We are arguiing the same point, just from two different perspectives. I do agree that Rails 4 is mature enough. But the culture is not. And that's what keeps Rails from replacing shitty Enterprise frameworks. A shame because Ruby is fun to write and very powerful.
