1 AM November 29, 2007

Paul King, co-author of Groovy in Action is speaking on Grails, the Groovy version of Ruby on Rails.

  • Grails is rip-off of Rails. Development in Grailsis much the same as Rails. It even has the same folder layout.
  • There is IDE support for Grails.
  • Grails is in its infancy. 1.0 due out in a few weeks.
  • Integrates robust tools such as Hibernate, Spring and Jetty.
  • Several Javascript frameworks incorporated, including Prototype, Dojo and Yahoo.
  • Because it uses Hibernate, Grails supports a wide range of databases.
  • Grails can build a standard WAR file, ready to be deployed to just about any Java servlet engine.
  • Grails “is growing enormously”. The number of people involved is growing by an order of magnitude every six months. (!)
  • Performance is comparable to Ruby on Rails, but somewhat slower than a bespoke Java web app. The good news is that it’s easy to replace performance hotspots with Java code.

Grails looks nice, partly because I can make use of the giant body of Java libraries in any Grails code I write. Next time I’m building a standalone web-app, I’ll definitely consider it.

Update: Paul, of course is also responsible for much of the Groovy content in the PLEAC.

By alang | # | Comments (4)
(Posted to Software Development and Java)


At 16:11, 29 Nov 2007 Danno Ferrin wrote:

Wow, did you have to use the biased term 'rip-off'? How about 'port' or 'deeply inspired by'

At 20:07, 29 Nov 2007 Alan Green wrote:

"Rip-off" was the term that Paul used. Perhaps I should have put it in quotes. As I heard it, there was no negative connotation implied, with the term being used to emphasise the similarities between the frameworks and to indicate the source of those similarities.

Is there some controversy in the Groovy community about this?

At 20:39, 29 Nov 2007 Danno Ferrin wrote:

I've only heard that term used in the connotation where it is a poor quality imitation ("It's jut a rip-off of The Matrix") or meaning that someone got cheated ("Man, look at that interest rate, what a rip-off"). I struggle to come up with a context where it isn't negative or derogotory.

There really isn't any controversy in the Groovy Community about Grails originating as a Groovy port of RoR. I've seen no effort to disguise that either. In fact, the original name of the project <i>was</i> Groovy on Rails until DHH politely asserted trademark ownership of '<foo> on Rails' (which if it did escalate beyond e-mail to a legal level I am confident DHH would win, at least in that context).

At 23:18, 29 Nov 2007 Paul King wrote:

Hi Danno, I was giving a 30 mins Grails talk slotted in between two Ruby talks. I did use the term "rip-off" but without any negative connotation. In the context of how it was presented (straight after a presentation of all the ideas behind Rails) I believe it would have been received in the right light (that I was trying to indicate that Grails and Rails are conceptually very similar - not like some of the other *ails frameworks that are "simply" a web framework not an all-encompassing convention over configuration stack).


Add Comment

(Not displayed)

(Leave blank line between paragraphs. URLs converted to links. HTML stripped. Indented source code will be formatted with <pre> tags.)

© 2003-2006 Alan Green