> I've still got a couple clients using 3.2 from 2012 and things aren't that different.
Which is exactly what makes Rails 4 and 5 a reasonable choice for slow-moving projects on a budget (i.e. no money to pay for massive library updates every N months).
I think the vocal early adopters are going to jump ship, if they haven't already. But I'm more likely than ever to start new projects on Rails.
Of course, if there's anything in particular that you are missing from Rails, then the lack of fundamental changes can be a showstopper.
Which is exactly what makes Rails 4 and 5 a reasonable choice for slow-moving projects on a budget (i.e. no money to pay for massive library updates every N months).
I think the vocal early adopters are going to jump ship, if they haven't already. But I'm more likely than ever to start new projects on Rails.
Of course, if there's anything in particular that you are missing from Rails, then the lack of fundamental changes can be a showstopper.