I wrote my last comment before you showed that promotional video you did with the ChatGPT voice. This is brilliant and exactly the way I would love to see you move forward.
Your last comment got automatically blocked by RUclips, but I was able to fish it out. You were saying that I would do well if I stop repeating the same criticisms of Laravel and Symfony. You were also offering advice about how to make Trongate grow - including building an ecosystem for sharing code. Your advice is clearly well intentioned and I appreciate that. Thank you.
I’m confused as to why HTMX 2.0 means you wouldn’t want to use it. Is you problem they released a 2.0 version at all? Would you rather they simply never made any improvements to the platform? It’s not like previous versions are completely unusable or incompatible now. The changes from 1.0 to 2.0 are extremely minor, and my understanding is the only reason it’s “2.0” seems to be because they dropped IE support, a decision everyone should be in favour of.
Respectfully, what you've just said is typical of the kind of criticisms that were common about three years ago. I like to think we've moved on from those kinds of arguments. However, just for anyone who might be new, here's your answer: The future growth and evolution of HTMX is none of my business. It's entirely for the maker(s) of HTMX to decide for themselves how they plan on moving their technology forward. That has nothing to do with me. To be clear, HTMX is an outstanding technology, and neither the integrity nor the skills of whoever is looking after HTMX are being questioned. It's a fantastic technology. I'm a fan. However, in the past, I - along with many millions (and I use the word appropriately) of developers - have been severely inconvenienced by framework makers who suddenly decide to completely rewrite their intellectual assets with breaking changes. This practice, when it happens, is incredibly destructive and unnecessary. Clients (i.e., the people who are good enough to hire developers) hate it, and it harms web development generally. I would insist that the practice of continually breaking intellectual assets, over and over, should be widely regarded as a negative thing. However, since around 2015, a bizarre phenomenon has emerged - particularly within the PHP community - where framework makers proudly rejoice in their continual breaking of their own intellectual assets. Indeed, some framework makers have given themselves clear financial incentives to break their own intellectual assets over and over. We see a clear example of this with the Symfony framework, where the guardians of Symfony sell framework certification (currently at 250 Euros a pop) that is tied to a particular version number of their framework. That type of business model financially rewards the maker of the framework for breaking their current version, making the current version an older version, and then quickly moving on to the next version. Given the fact that web developers generally have higher than average IQs, you would think that web developers would be the first to raise concerns when framework makers continually break or re-version their intellectual assets with no obvious benefit to the end user. On the contrary, however, developers, in general, proved themselves to be more agreeable (i.e., dumb) than some may have assumed. That's because, instead of frowning upon the practice of continually breaking stuff, they celebrate it! They do so under the erroneous assumption that breaking stuff continuously makes it more modern. If you challenge any of those low-IQ developers by (let's say) building a framework that prioritizes stability, they often revert to arguments so poorly thought out that they qualify for the phrase 'child-like'. For example, they'll say things like, "Oh, so you're just going to make Trongate go out of date?" Whether they're unaware that it's possible to update frameworks without breaking them or whether they're just pretending to be idiots is something of a mystery. In any event, this bizarre and highly destructive phenomenon is something that I call "rewrite culture". And now, I'm going to make everything I've said completely weak by doing something that you're not supposed to do online. I'm going to add nuance. So, on the off chance that somebody reading does have an attention span greater than that of a goldfish, allow me to add a little nuance: There are certain types of software assets that benefit from, and even need frequent rewrites. One such example is 'Electron'. The makers of Electron have burdened themselves with building and maintaining a library that works with all three major operating systems. That's an almighty challenge, and what they've created is technically very impressive. However, if the makers of Electron suddenly stop working on it, then it would quickly become out of date and perhaps even unusable, as various operating systems are modified over time. Therefore, if I happen to be an Electron developer, I'll be saying "yes, please" to lots of versions. However, in the case of PHP, we have a language that is built upon C - a language so stable that it gets used in military tanks. Whilst I accept the proposition that something like Electron requires ongoing breaking changes (i.e., rewrites), the same cannot be said for PHP frameworks. So, I'm the guy who calls all of that out. My arguments are crystal clear. I've been making those arguments since 2012, and if you have a look at the technologies that are leading the jobs market, you'll see that they all favor stability. The insane rewrite culture that has taken over web development is certainly not a norm that is found within the wider IT community. As for HTMX? I'm not a JavaScript guy, and that's not my world. I have no plans whatsoever of throwing my hat into the JavaScript ring. I'm sure the maker(s) of HTMX know best how to move forward with their library. I support them. I wish them well. I also thank them and applaud them for the inspiration. However, the one thing I will not do is depend upon them. The Trongate framework has no third-party dependencies. It's the highest priority for the framework.
![Business Analyst Full Course [2024] | Business Analyst Tutorial For Beginners | Edureka](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/czymrnQV2p4/mqdefault.jpg)
I couldn't agree more, David! Great stuff! I'm using HTMX in production now, and I'm loving it!
I wrote my last comment before you showed that promotional video you did with the ChatGPT voice. This is brilliant and exactly the way I would love to see you move forward.
Your last comment got automatically blocked by RUclips, but I was able to fish it out. You were saying that I would do well if I stop repeating the same criticisms of Laravel and Symfony. You were also offering advice about how to make Trongate grow - including building an ecosystem for sharing code. Your advice is clearly well intentioned and I appreciate that. Thank you.
I’m confused as to why HTMX 2.0 means you wouldn’t want to use it. Is you problem they released a 2.0 version at all? Would you rather they simply never made any improvements to the platform? It’s not like previous versions are completely unusable or incompatible now. The changes from 1.0 to 2.0 are extremely minor, and my understanding is the only reason it’s “2.0” seems to be because they dropped IE support, a decision everyone should be in favour of.
Respectfully, what you've just said is typical of the kind of criticisms that were common about three years ago. I like to think we've moved on from those kinds of arguments. However, just for anyone who might be new, here's your answer:
The future growth and evolution of HTMX is none of my business. It's entirely for the maker(s) of HTMX to decide for themselves how they plan on moving their technology forward. That has nothing to do with me. To be clear, HTMX is an outstanding technology, and neither the integrity nor the skills of whoever is looking after HTMX are being questioned. It's a fantastic technology. I'm a fan.
However, in the past, I - along with many millions (and I use the word appropriately) of developers - have been severely inconvenienced by framework makers who suddenly decide to completely rewrite their intellectual assets with breaking changes. This practice, when it happens, is incredibly destructive and unnecessary. Clients (i.e., the people who are good enough to hire developers) hate it, and it harms web development generally.
I would insist that the practice of continually breaking intellectual assets, over and over, should be widely regarded as a negative thing. However, since around 2015, a bizarre phenomenon has emerged - particularly within the PHP community - where framework makers proudly rejoice in their continual breaking of their own intellectual assets. Indeed, some framework makers have given themselves clear financial incentives to break their own intellectual assets over and over. We see a clear example of this with the Symfony framework, where the guardians of Symfony sell framework certification (currently at 250 Euros a pop) that is tied to a particular version number of their framework. That type of business model financially rewards the maker of the framework for breaking their current version, making the current version an older version, and then quickly moving on to the next version.
Given the fact that web developers generally have higher than average IQs, you would think that web developers would be the first to raise concerns when framework makers continually break or re-version their intellectual assets with no obvious benefit to the end user. On the contrary, however, developers, in general, proved themselves to be more agreeable (i.e., dumb) than some may have assumed. That's because, instead of frowning upon the practice of continually breaking stuff, they celebrate it! They do so under the erroneous assumption that breaking stuff continuously makes it more modern.
If you challenge any of those low-IQ developers by (let's say) building a framework that prioritizes stability, they often revert to arguments so poorly thought out that they qualify for the phrase 'child-like'. For example, they'll say things like, "Oh, so you're just going to make Trongate go out of date?" Whether they're unaware that it's possible to update frameworks without breaking them or whether they're just pretending to be idiots is something of a mystery. In any event, this bizarre and highly destructive phenomenon is something that I call "rewrite culture".
And now, I'm going to make everything I've said completely weak by doing something that you're not supposed to do online. I'm going to add nuance. So, on the off chance that somebody reading does have an attention span greater than that of a goldfish, allow me to add a little nuance:
There are certain types of software assets that benefit from, and even need frequent rewrites. One such example is 'Electron'. The makers of Electron have burdened themselves with building and maintaining a library that works with all three major operating systems. That's an almighty challenge, and what they've created is technically very impressive. However, if the makers of Electron suddenly stop working on it, then it would quickly become out of date and perhaps even unusable, as various operating systems are modified over time. Therefore, if I happen to be an Electron developer, I'll be saying "yes, please" to lots of versions. However, in the case of PHP, we have a language that is built upon C - a language so stable that it gets used in military tanks. Whilst I accept the proposition that something like Electron requires ongoing breaking changes (i.e., rewrites), the same cannot be said for PHP frameworks. So, I'm the guy who calls all of that out. My arguments are crystal clear. I've been making those arguments since 2012, and if you have a look at the technologies that are leading the jobs market, you'll see that they all favor stability.
The insane rewrite culture that has taken over web development is certainly not a norm that is found within the wider IT community.
As for HTMX? I'm not a JavaScript guy, and that's not my world. I have no plans whatsoever of throwing my hat into the JavaScript ring. I'm sure the maker(s) of HTMX know best how to move forward with their library. I support them. I wish them well. I also thank them and applaud them for the inspiration. However, the one thing I will not do is depend upon them.
The Trongate framework has no third-party dependencies. It's the highest priority for the framework.
With an expectation of success :)