Greetings all, I have been reading this list on and off since I signed up for it, and I have to say that every now and then I find something quite useful as a rails beginner. I have been mostly a designer, with a lot of CSS experience who has verged and dabbled a bit with development work, and took on Rails. I am quite beginner with Rails, databases, and backend work in general. I find a lot of the stuff on this list (majority) is well in the deep end for me. What I am wondering, is there any kind of rails forums online or tutorials and resources for someone coming at it from my angle as opposed to a seasoned developer? If not, what would you reccomend for someone who wants mostly to work with creating my own dynamic websites and web apps? I already have Agile With Rails so that is a good start, but looking for supplement. Thanks in advance.
Hi, Getting really cozy with programming in general and Ruby in
specific, along with a good understanding of databases, 3rd Normal form,
etc is invaluable. Both goals are less Rails specific, so you can learn
them from anywhere. I just came across this intro programming site:
http://www.freenetpages.co.uk/hp/alan.gauld/
It''s from a Python perspective, but the core concepts are very similar.
There''s also a section on SQL/table setup ("Working with
Databases")
that seems like a great brief introduction.
Jason Pfeifer wrote:> Greetings all,
>
> I have been reading this list on and off since I signed up for it, and I
> have to say that every now and then I find something quite useful as a
> rails beginner. I have been mostly a designer, with a lot of CSS
> experience who has verged and dabbled a bit with development work, and
> took on Rails.
>
> I am quite beginner with Rails, databases, and backend work in general.
> I find a lot of the stuff on this list (majority) is well in the deep
> end for me. What I am wondering, is there any kind of rails forums
> online or tutorials and resources for someone coming at it from my angle
> as opposed to a seasoned developer? If not, what would you reccomend
> for someone who wants mostly to work with creating my own dynamic
> websites and web apps?
>
> I already have Agile With Rails so that is a good start, but looking for
> supplement. Thanks in advance.
On Sep 23, 2005, at 11:36 PM, Jason Pfeifer wrote:> I have been reading this list on and off since I signed up for it, > and I have to say that every now and then I find something quite > useful as a rails beginner. I have been mostly a designer, with a > lot of CSS experience who has verged and dabbled a bit with > development work, and took on Rails.Excellent.> I am quite beginner with Rails, databases, and backend work in > general. I find a lot of the stuff on this list (majority) is well > in the deep end for me. What I am wondering, is there any kind of > rails forums online or tutorials and resources for someone coming > at it from my angle as opposed to a seasoned developer? If not, > what would you reccomend for someone who wants mostly to work with > creating my own dynamic websites and web apps?I''m sort of going the other direction -- as a long-time backend person, I want to do more customer-facing work. So, resources: 1) Get a good book on SQL (specific to whatever database you use). There''s really only four basic sql statements (select, insert, update, and delete), but it''s the permutations that''ll get you. 2) Get books on Ruby as well as the Rails book you''ve got. Programming Ruby is quite excellent.> I already have Agile With Rails so that is a good start, but > looking for supplement. Thanks in advance.It''s such a new field that there''s not a lot (that''s organized) out there that''s specific to Rails. Here''s how I learn new things: 1) Look at code for projects (esp. http://api.rubyonrails.com/) -- I learn a lot there. 2) Hang out on IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #rubyonrails can be really helpful
> I am quite beginner with Rails, databases, and backend work in general. > I find a lot of the stuff on this list (majority) is well in the deep > end for me. What I am wondering, is there any kind of rails forums > online or tutorials and resources for someone coming at it from my angle > as opposed to a seasoned developer? If not, what would you reccomend > for someone who wants mostly to work with creating my own dynamic > websites and web apps?Hi Jason, Here''s the way I went about it long ago, maybe it will be useful to you: 1. Make sure you don''t look at this as one big thing. Break it into the pieces it is, and go one by one. For example, if you haven''t worked much with databases, I would recommend you start with something you can get up and running easily like sqlite (www.sqlite.org). Once you have that up and running, find any examples (schema''s) you can (google) and just go through the process of duplicating the example: CREATE TABLE blah (..... etc. Make sure you type them in (not copy/paste), which will help you remember/learn what your doing. Once you''ve got a small database created, add some records (refer to the manual as you need to complete a step you''re not sure how to). Try to experiment as much as you can with sqlite alone. If you get a grasp on the core SQL statements, you will be able to apply them to other databases with little difference in syntax. After a while, you''ve got database fundamentals down. Next, you may want to get familiar with Linux or FreeBSD. I guess you could skip this step for now if you just wanted to dive right into programming, but you will need it as some point when you want to turn a project live. Then, you should install Ruby, and go through the very basics using irb (that''s the command to run Ruby interactively). When you get in there, you can mess around with some basic code and get instant feedback. There are good beginner Ruby sites with the very basic (assign a string to a variable, etc). Once you get some confidence, you could create some simple programs in files (IE. my_test.rb), and run them (ruby my_test.rb). No need to do anything fancy here, maybe just a simple program or two that adds numbers together and prints the output or something. Depending on how much development experience you have, you might not need to go through this process. If you understand basic programming concepts, turning those into Ruby code is pretty straight forward in Rails because the underlying stuff is already done for you, all you have to do is put the logic in. When you finally get to Rails, again, I would just recommend you complete tutorials by manually typing them, and making sure you understand what your typing - and if you don''t understand what your typing, you probably will after you''ve typed the next thing. Theres a lot of that when going to a new language... sometimes you do something you don''t understand but it becomes apparent after you move to the next step. All in all, expect to be pretty clueless for a few weeks until one day... bam... it clicks. The trick is to not stop before you hit that point. 2. Learn by examples and worry about being resourceful over knowing everything off the top of your head. If you need to do something like format a number into currency, search for it. Don''t spend too much time trying to do it yourself. After you''ve needed to format currency a few times, you will start to pick up on the way the example you found works. But, more importantly, you will get better at finding those examples of code quickly. You''ll then be able to use your own projects as your examples when you need to repeat something, and eventually you''ll engrave those snippets of code into memory. I cant stress #2 enough. I learned entirely using this method... in fact, the Rails book is the only book Ive ever bought on any type of programming, and even at that I bought it mostly as a souvenir :) since I had the basic down a bit before it came out (which I''m actually using now as I''m exploring some areas of Rails I hadn''t used much before). Ive seen the benefits of this strategy many times while working in an office with other programmers. You''ll see guys sitting in front of a computer with their noses in books all day! You ask them what they are trying to do, and you can usually go google them an example in a minute or two and they seem amazed (or better yet, you have a pretty good idea of how to do it because you have dabbled in so many pieces of code that you have the whit to come up with your own snippet). I hope this helps. If this was way too basic for you, sorry about that. I''m not really sure what "stage" your at with your development, so I just made an assumption. On the other hand, if you''ve already got these basics under your belt, your not far from your goals. Joe Noon
1/ The traffic is too high in this forum. It should be splitted: - rails_newbies - rails - rails_advanced When a newbie - like me -, you should only read and post in the first newsgroup. After a while, you''d move to the other 2. 2/ Another problem is that the answer to many questions is, or could be, :"R.T.F. Agile book". There should be a single entry point to a free and _easy to navigate through_ alternative, like Sun''s Java Tutorials (That you can also find in book format btw). Alain
> The traffic is too high in this forum. It should be splitted: > > - rails_newbies > - rails > - rails_advancedI don''t agree that this would be a beneficial approach. 1. The dynamic in the Rails community is not based on this philosophy. Ive never seen a more helpful group. 2. People learn by teaching. Even reiterating the most basic things is beneficial and helps you refine your own process. I can envision a metaphor between this and Test Driven Development believe it or not :) Might be a stretch so I''ll keep it to myself. 3. The better your teacher the better you are - "dumb teaching dumber" isn''t a good approach. People excel around people that excel.
Ive been through the same thing Here are my suggestion. 1. Get the agile book or pdf 2. get the pickaxe ruby book 3. Get a good sql reference book. It doesnt need to be database specific. As most dbs are very similiar for 90% of the sql you will have to write. Its more important to learn the hows and whys of SQL first. 4. Grab small opensource projects to see how they work. Dont look at them as a whole like Joe Noon said above. try to look at pieces. What I did is start making completely useless small apps to get a feel for rails and ruby. as well as doing the great tutorials found on the rails website. Lets see what I did to start todolist note taker dvd catalogue recipe list then moved to slightly harder things family noteboard kids soccer schedule daily expense log online bookmark site I cant emphasize enough to start with something simple and expand it as your skills do. You will end up rewriting all of these many times as you figure out better ways of doing the same things. Ive delivered 4 production rails apps since feb. and am working on 5 and 6 as we speak. Just take your time. And allways remember There is no such thing as a stupid question when your trying to learn something. Just dont ask a question unless you have put some effort into finding the answer Sam On 9/24/05, Joe Noon <joenoon-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > > The traffic is too high in this forum. It should be splitted: > > > > - rails_newbies > > - rails > > - rails_advanced > > I don''t agree that this would be a beneficial approach. > > 1. The dynamic in the Rails community is not based on this philosophy. > Ive never seen a more helpful group. > > 2. People learn by teaching. Even reiterating the most basic things > is beneficial and helps you refine your own process. I can envision a > metaphor between this and Test Driven Development believe it or not :) > Might be a stretch so I''ll keep it to myself. > > 3. The better your teacher the better you are - "dumb teaching > dumber" isn''t a good approach. People excel around people that excel. > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >_______________________________________________ Rails mailing list Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
Couldn''t agree more. Especially about writing lots of simple apps that you don''t mind reworking (over and over and over... ;-) ) but that you or your familly or friends will actually use. The way to learn to write good code is to read great code and then write and write and write. You need to get the language syntax and style hard wired, that way you can focus on what you want to do rather than how to do it. Ruby on Rails is a great example of a "little" or "domain specific" language (partly because Ruby is a great language for writing DSLs in). Half of what you will be doing is learning the Ruby language; half, the rails language. I think its like learning to be a writer, have a look at Jerry Pournelle''s notes on becoming a writer here: http://www.jerrypournelle.com/slowchange/myjob.html . I think they apply, pretty much unchanged to become a programmer. Cheers Tom Sam Mayes wrote:>Ive been through the same thing Here are my suggestion. > >1. Get the agile book or pdf >2. get the pickaxe ruby book >3. Get a good sql reference book. It doesnt need to be database specific. As >most dbs are very similiar for 90% of the sql you will have to write. Its >more important to learn the hows and whys of SQL first. >4. Grab small opensource projects to see how they work. Dont look at them as >a whole like Joe Noon said above. try to look at pieces. > >What I did is start making completely useless small apps to get a feel for >rails and ruby. as well as doing the great tutorials found on the rails >website. > >Lets see what I did to start >todolist >note taker >dvd catalogue >recipe list > >then moved to slightly harder things >family noteboard >kids soccer schedule >daily expense log >online bookmark site > > >I cant emphasize enough to start with something simple and expand it as your >skills do. You will end up rewriting all of these many times as you figure >out better ways of doing the same things. Ive delivered 4 production rails >apps since feb. and am working on 5 and 6 as we speak. Just take your time. >And allways remember > >There is no such thing as a stupid question when your trying to learn >something. Just dont ask a question unless you have put some effort into >finding the answer > > >Sam > > >On 9/24/05, Joe Noon <joenoon-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > >>>The traffic is too high in this forum. It should be splitted: >>> >>>- rails_newbies >>>- rails >>>- rails_advanced >>> >>> >>I don''t agree that this would be a beneficial approach. >> >>1. The dynamic in the Rails community is not based on this philosophy. >>Ive never seen a more helpful group. >> >>2. People learn by teaching. Even reiterating the most basic things >>is beneficial and helps you refine your own process. I can envision a >>metaphor between this and Test Driven Development believe it or not :) >>Might be a stretch so I''ll keep it to myself. >> >>3. The better your teacher the better you are - "dumb teaching >>dumber" isn''t a good approach. People excel around people that excel. >>_______________________________________________ >>Rails mailing list >>Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org >>http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >> >> >> > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >Rails mailing list >Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org >http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.6/111 - Release Date: 23/09/2005 > >
Joe
> >The traffic is too high in this forum. It should be splitted:
> 1. The dynamic in the Rails community is not based on this
philosophy.
It''s not a philosophy. It''s an ordering suggestion.
Kids learn reading by reading kids book, then they move to more complex
ones, progressively.
Currently, they are in a public library with a stupid librarian : all
the books are arranged by arrival date.
> I don''t agree that this would be a beneficial approach.
None of the 3 points you mentioned contradict my suggestion, nor explain
why you don''t agree.
Please clarify: why do you think the community would not be better
served if the current bloat was a little ordered.
Alain
On Sep 24, 2005, at 5:33 AM, Sam Mayes wrote:> 3. Get a good sql reference book. It doesnt need to be database > specific. As most dbs are very similiar for 90% of the sql you will > have to write. Its more important to learn the hows and whys of SQL > first.If you''re new to database generally (and SQL specifically), the differences between SQL versions will tend to frustrate you more. That''s why I suggested a db-specific book. I do agree with the approach to bite off some small applications that are useful to you.
Do you really think that people would go to the "newbies" forum if they considered themselves "advanced" rails users? You''d get a FEW, but no one would really read all three. And we''re not children - we can understand "advanced" concepts even if we''re not capable of pumping them out ourselves, and being exposed to such things and asking questions about them is how a lot of people learn. On 9/24/05, Alain Ravet <arav2132-6SW1mVBvVAbXsMajfR9tMA@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > Joe > > >The traffic is too high in this forum. It should be splitted: > > 1. The dynamic in the Rails community is not based on this > philosophy. > > It''s not a philosophy. It''s an ordering suggestion. > Kids learn reading by reading kids book, then they move to more complex > ones, progressively. > Currently, they are in a public library with a stupid librarian : all > the books are arranged by arrival date. > > > > I don''t agree that this would be a beneficial approach. > > None of the 3 points you mentioned contradict my suggestion, nor explain > why you don''t agree. > Please clarify: why do you think the community would not be better > served if the current bloat was a little ordered. > > Alain > > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >_______________________________________________ Rails mailing list Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
I totally agree there shouldnt be 3 sep lists. The way I learned many "advanced" topics is jsut reading this and the ruby list. Seeing something "neat" and then going and trying it. And it would defintely be to much for me to monitor more lists I have enough as it is. re: generic sql book I suggested this as a learning excercise to grasp the concepts. I should have stated you should get a good reference for the db system you will be using. Just about ANY oreilly book on dbs are excellent. I have all their oracle and mysql tomes. Sam On 9/24/05, Patrick McCafferty <ryouga-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > Do you really think that people would go to the "newbies" forum if they > considered themselves "advanced" rails users? > > You''d get a FEW, but no one would really read all three. And we''re not > children - we can understand "advanced" concepts even if we''re not capable > of pumping them out ourselves, and being exposed to such things and asking > questions about them is how a lot of people learn. > > On 9/24/05, Alain Ravet <arav2132-6SW1mVBvVAbXsMajfR9tMA@public.gmane.org > wrote: > > > > Joe > > > >The traffic is too high in this forum. It should be splitted: > > > 1. The dynamic in the Rails community is not based on this > > philosophy. > > > > It''s not a philosophy. It''s an ordering suggestion. > > Kids learn reading by reading kids book, then they move to more complex > > ones, progressively. > > Currently, they are in a public library with a stupid librarian : all > > the books are arranged by arrival date. > > > > > > > I don''t agree that this would be a beneficial approach. > > > > None of the 3 points you mentioned contradict my suggestion, nor explain > > why you don''t agree. > > Please clarify: why do you think the community would not be better > > served if the current bloat was a little ordered. > > > > Alain > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rails mailing list > > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails > > >_______________________________________________ Rails mailing list Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
One other thing. Dont get bogged down trying to figure out what to do. This hampered me at first, and why i suggested starting with silly small apps. It gets you doing SOMETHING instead of sitting trying to figure out what to do. I cant express how important it is to just start with something as then your mind will take over with thoughts like "I could add this" or "wouldnt it be cool if it could do this". THAT is what you need to do. Sam On 9/24/05, Sam Mayes <codeslave-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > I totally agree there shouldnt be 3 sep lists. The way I learned many > "advanced" topics is jsut reading this and the ruby list. Seeing something > "neat" and then going and trying it. And it would defintely be to much for > me to monitor more lists I have enough as it is. > > > re: generic sql book > > I suggested this as a learning excercise to grasp the concepts. I should > have stated you should get a good reference for the db system you will be > using. Just about ANY oreilly book on dbs are excellent. I have all their > oracle and mysql tomes. > > > Sam > > On 9/24/05, Patrick McCafferty <ryouga-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > Do you really think that people would go to the "newbies" forum if they > > considered themselves "advanced" rails users? > > > > You''d get a FEW, but no one would really read all three. And we''re not > > children - we can understand "advanced" concepts even if we''re not capable > > of pumping them out ourselves, and being exposed to such things and asking > > questions about them is how a lot of people learn. > > > > On 9/24/05, Alain Ravet < arav2132-6SW1mVBvVAbXsMajfR9tMA@public.gmane.org > wrote: > > > > > > Joe > > > > >The traffic is too high in this forum. It should be splitted: > > > > 1. The dynamic in the Rails community is not based on this > > > philosophy. > > > > > > It''s not a philosophy. It''s an ordering suggestion. > > > Kids learn reading by reading kids book, then they move to more > > > complex > > > ones, progressively. > > > Currently, they are in a public library with a stupid librarian : all > > > the books are arranged by arrival date. > > > > > > > > > > I don''t agree that this would be a beneficial approach. > > > > > > None of the 3 points you mentioned contradict my suggestion, nor > > > explain > > > why you don''t agree. > > > Please clarify: why do you think the community would not be better > > > served if the current bloat was a little ordered. > > > > > > Alain > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Rails mailing list > > > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > > > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rails mailing list > > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ Rails mailing list Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
Patrick
> And we''re not children - we can understand
"advanced" concepts even
> if we''re not capable of pumping them out ourselves, and
being
exposed to such things
> and asking questions about them is how a lot of people learn.
I agree fully when the forum traffic is 10-20 messages/day, but not when
it''s 100-200+/messages a day.
When you''re a newbie, advanced questions AND answers are just noise,
and
you learn nothing from trying to understand them, except that you still
have a lot to learn! And No, for most questions/threads, you can''t tell
easily from the title, or the first paragraph if its advanced or not.
Alain
On Sep 23, 2005, at 11:36 PM, Jason Pfeifer wrote:> What I am wondering, is there any kind of rails forums online orhttp://forum.textdrive.com/viewforum.php?id=9 was started by david about a year ago. Anyone from anywhere is more than welcome to post whatever there. People stop by from google all the time and ask/ discuss things. - Jason
I must agree with Patrick on splitting the list. There is no way that I would have got nearly as much from a newbie list as quickly as I have from this one. I consider myself very new at ruby and rails (and programming in general), but I have seen some very interesting topics on DB''s, programming in general as well as rails ways, but more importantly I''ve been exposed to the Philosophies from the experts. Not something I would expect to find on a newbie list. These insights have given me hints on what to do and what not to do specific to tasks that aren''t included in the tutorials. If the problem is ordering/sorting mail for what you want, use gmail. The conversation organisiation keeps the line items in your inbox to a minimum, and you can just search for what you want if your looking for something specific. Anywho... Just my two cents On 9/25/05, Alain Ravet <arav2132-6SW1mVBvVAbXsMajfR9tMA@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > Patrick > > And we''re not children - we can understand "advanced" concepts even > > if we''re not capable of pumping them out ourselves, and being > exposed to such things > > and asking questions about them is how a lot of people learn. > > > I agree fully when the forum traffic is 10-20 messages/day, but not when > it''s 100-200+/messages a day. > > When you''re a newbie, advanced questions AND answers are just noise, and > you learn nothing from trying to understand them, except that you still > have a lot to learn! And No, for most questions/threads, you can''t tell > easily from the title, or the first paragraph if its advanced or not. > > > Alain > > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >_______________________________________________ Rails mailing list Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
Liquid
> I must agree with Patrick on splitting the list. There is no way
that I
> would have got nearly as much from a newbie list as quickly as I
have
> from this one.
The rails_basics list is where you POST basic/newbie questions.
Nobody can stop you from reading the other lists. Who said that? Who
wrote that?
I don''t get it? Where is the problem? It''s just a tag -
"basic" ,
"advanced" - that is added to a message.
Since when is tagged information poorer and less convenient to use than
non-tagged information?
If
- we could add tags to messages,
- people would write better msg subjects
we wouldn''t need a better way to handle the high traffic.
Alain
Hi> I don''t get it? Where is the problem? It''s just a tag - "basic" , > "advanced" - that is added to a message. > Since when is tagged information poorer and less convenient to use > than non-tagged information?I don''t really think that is a very good idea. From what I read on this list, the press and gather from developers I know, many experienced developers come to RoR with a more or less professional background (Java, PHP if you trust the survey posted on the RoR weblog). I have started out from that direction, too. While I''m pretty experienced at programming, database design, even MVC and web development, I was new to RoR and it is a bit confusing at first. If you have the Agile book and at least the URL of the 1.6 Pickaxe book (printed book is better I''ve been told :), it is very realistic that you are on the same level as many people who would consider themselves "medium" on this list. Thus I think there are many experienced developers that are new to RoR and don''t want to stop at the Todo List and Weblog tutorials for two weeks. They may just jump into their real projects after some days reading books and tutorials. This means that it is highly propable that a "newbie" to RoR will ask advanced questions regarding the framework simply because he knows what is possible with frameworks and is maybe nontrivial with RoR. So: Who says how to tag the posts? Just my 2 cents. Regards Manuel Holtgrewe
i think one of the questions is how many people are going to actually ''care''. where is the line drawn for a ''basic'' and ''advanced'' question. is anyone going to worry about where there posting there question? from my personal understanding of a persons mindset would be more toward a "questions" section or simply "general" section... no one is going to / going to want to look at ''basic questions'' and ''advanced questions'' and contimplate where to post there question. i could understand splitting questions based on a ''department'' of some sort. like ''db questions'', and ''framework related'', or even into each part of rails ''activerecord'', ''actionpack'', etc, etc. just.my.2.cent :/ On 9/25/05, Manuel Holtgrewe <purestorm-nlpEiS6K5uusTnJN9+BGXg@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Hi > > > I don''t get it? Where is the problem? It''s just a tag - "basic" , > > "advanced" - that is added to a message. > > Since when is tagged information poorer and less convenient to use > > than non-tagged information? > > I don''t really think that is a very good idea. From what I read on > this list, the press and gather from developers I know, many > experienced developers come to RoR with a more or less professional > background (Java, PHP if you trust the survey posted on the RoR weblog). > > I have started out from that direction, too. While I''m pretty > experienced at programming, database design, even MVC and web > development, I was new to RoR and it is a bit confusing at first. If > you have the Agile book and at least the URL of the 1.6 Pickaxe book > (printed book is better I''ve been told :), it is very realistic that > you are on the same level as many people who would consider > themselves "medium" on this list. > > Thus I think there are many experienced developers that are new to > RoR and don''t want to stop at the Todo List and Weblog tutorials for > two weeks. They may just jump into their real projects after some > days reading books and tutorials. This means that it is highly > propable that a "newbie" to RoR will ask advanced questions regarding > the framework simply because he knows what is possible with > frameworks and is maybe nontrivial with RoR. > > So: Who says how to tag the posts? > > Just my 2 cents. > > Regards > > Manuel Holtgrewe > > > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >-- Zachery Hostens <zacheryph-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
I couldn''t disagree more. I subscribe to lists for technologies I know nothing about and the most interesting messages to me are the ones where someone solves a really complex problem. They show me how the guts work.> From: Alain Ravet <arav2132-6SW1mVBvVAbXsMajfR9tMA@public.gmane.org> > Reply-To: <rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org> > Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 20:45:55 +0200 > To: <rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org> > Subject: [Rails] Re: Rails Forums Online > > When you''re a newbie, advanced questions AND answers are just noise, and > you learn nothing from trying to understand them, except that you still > have a lot to learn! And No, for most questions/threads, you can''t tell > easily from the title, or the first paragraph if its advanced or not. >
In my experience, people will cross-post and/or post their questions wherever they think they will get an answer, regardless of the designation of the list. Splitting the list is a bad idea. The cross posting will generate more messages for folks that want to be on all the lists and it will mean that advanced users that don''t want to see the newbie questions will never help a newbie.> From: Zachery Hostens <zacheryph-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > Reply-To: Zachery Hostens <zacheryph-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>, <rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org> > Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 06:55:43 -0400 > To: <rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org> > Subject: Re: [Rails] Re: Rails Forums Online > > i think one of the questions is how many people are going to actually ''care''. > > where is the line drawn for a ''basic'' and ''advanced'' question. is > anyone going to worry about where there posting there question? from > my personal understanding of a persons mindset would be more toward a > "questions" section or simply "general" section... no one is going to > / going to want to look at ''basic questions'' and ''advanced questions'' > and contimplate where to post there question. > > i could understand splitting questions based on a ''department'' of some > sort. like ''db questions'', and ''framework related'', or even into each > part of rails ''activerecord'', ''actionpack'', etc, etc. > > just.my.2.cent :/ > > On 9/25/05, Manuel Holtgrewe <purestorm-nlpEiS6K5uusTnJN9+BGXg@public.gmane.org> wrote: >> Hi >> >>> I don''t get it? Where is the problem? It''s just a tag - "basic" , >>> "advanced" - that is added to a message. >>> Since when is tagged information poorer and less convenient to use >>> than non-tagged information? >> >> I don''t really think that is a very good idea. From what I read on >> this list, the press and gather from developers I know, many >> experienced developers come to RoR with a more or less professional >> background (Java, PHP if you trust the survey posted on the RoR weblog). >> >> I have started out from that direction, too. While I''m pretty >> experienced at programming, database design, even MVC and web >> development, I was new to RoR and it is a bit confusing at first. If >> you have the Agile book and at least the URL of the 1.6 Pickaxe book >> (printed book is better I''ve been told :), it is very realistic that >> you are on the same level as many people who would consider >> themselves "medium" on this list. >> >> Thus I think there are many experienced developers that are new to >> RoR and don''t want to stop at the Todo List and Weblog tutorials for >> two weeks. They may just jump into their real projects after some >> days reading books and tutorials. This means that it is highly >> propable that a "newbie" to RoR will ask advanced questions regarding >> the framework simply because he knows what is possible with >> frameworks and is maybe nontrivial with RoR. >> >> So: Who says how to tag the posts? >> >> Just my 2 cents. >> >> Regards >> >> Manuel Holtgrewe >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rails mailing list >> Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org >> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >> > > > -- > Zachery Hostens <zacheryph-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
Hunter Hillegas wrote:
> In my experience, people will cross-post and/or post their questions
People need to be educated.
> Splitting the list is a bad idea. The cross posting will generate more
> messages for folks that want to be on all the lists
see previous comment.
Based on my experience, categorized newsgroups are a good thing.
Example:
Jetbrains (the makers of IDEA) have about a dozen newsgroups for 1
single product (IDEA).
- announcements
- documentation
- bugs
- features (requests)
- cvs
- ui designer
- plugins
- openAPI
...
If you are a CVS newbie, for example, you''d first read the CVS
newsgroup
entire archives, and search for similar problems. If you didn''t find
anything, you would post a new question in this same forum.
People who knows nothing/have no interest in CVS won''t read your
message.
Imagine all those newsgroup merged into one : it would be unusable. A
nightmare.
Categorizing is good.
BTW, have you noticed that some people tag their message with
"[newbie]".
Alain
I think that centralizing the community is best. Personally, as a "newbie" to Rails, I''ve enjoyed reading all the conversation that was over my head and trying to learn from it, even if I don''t completely understand it yet. I save alot of messages in my archive because I think they might be useful when I get to that maturity as a Rails Developer. One of the strong points about Rails is the community and everyone''s willingness to help each other. I don''t think it would be very wise to fragment the community just to be slightly more organized. Of course, I could always deal without deleting all the User group "meeting" messages, but that doesn''t really bother me. I think for the gain it would give, it would be best to leave the community whole rather than require members to sign up to 5-10 different groups. I think Rails is trying to make it easier on the users and grab as many as possible, not alienate them by obfuscating the newsgroups. Just my thoughts, Jason On Sep 27, 2005, at 2:33 AM, Alain Ravet wrote:> Hunter Hillegas wrote: > > > In my experience, people will cross-post and/or post their > questions > People need to be educated. > > > Splitting the list is a bad idea. The cross posting will > generate more > > messages for folks that want to be on all the lists > see previous comment. > > > Based on my experience, categorized newsgroups are a good thing. > > Example: > Jetbrains (the makers of IDEA) have about a dozen newsgroups for 1 > single product (IDEA). > - announcements > - documentation > - bugs > - features (requests) > - cvs > - ui designer > - plugins > - openAPI > ... > > If you are a CVS newbie, for example, you''d first read the CVS > newsgroup entire archives, and search for similar problems. If you > didn''t find anything, you would post a new question in this same > forum. > People who knows nothing/have no interest in CVS won''t read your > message. > > Imagine all those newsgroup merged into one : it would be unusable. > A nightmare. > Categorizing is good. > > > > BTW, have you noticed that some people tag their message with > "[newbie]". > > > Alain > > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails > >
On 27/09/05, Alain Ravet <arav2132-6SW1mVBvVAbXsMajfR9tMA@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Example:No offence, but i think your example doesn''t support your point of separting this list in different experience-levels. Let me try to explain why:> Jetbrains (the makers of IDEA) have about a dozen newsgroups for 1 > single product (IDEA). > - announcements > - documentation > - bugs > - features (requests) > - cvs > - ui designer > - plugins > - openAPI > ...These are different newsgroups for different part off the tool, not for different "experience" levels.> If you are a CVS newbie, for example, you''d first read the CVS newsgroup > entire archives, and search for similar problems. If you didn''t find > anything, you would post a new question in this same forum.In this case, the CVS-question, you know in which group to post your question. But as a rails-newbie, you don''t know if your question is easy, medium or hard. Therefore it is hard to "guess" in which group to post.> Imagine all those newsgroup merged into one : it would be unusable. A > nightmare. > Categorizing is good.Categorizing on categories that are clearly separated (CVS is clearly something else than a GUI) can certanly be advantage for high-traffic lists, but separating on "difficulty" is no good. grtz, wannes