[Catalyst] RFC: The paradox of choice in web development

[Dan Dascalescu]

>> Actually, the community will probably benefit most from writing code.
>> Talking about talking about something doesn't actually buy you much.
>> New modules that make programming easier are definitely more appealing
>> all around.
>>
> Well, yes and no.  Not everyone has the same skillset.  Some people you want
> spending time working on the code [...] Other people have excellent
> communication skills, and may not necessarily be at the level of coder
> you want making best-practices tools for others

Exactly. As mst said [1],

"If you aren't good enough to write code, submit patches. If you
aren't good enough to submit patches, write documentation. If you
don't know enough about the project to write documentation, point out
what's missing from the documentation to make the project easy to
understand. Anyhow, CONTRIBUTE!"

[1] http://www.shadowcat.co.uk/archive/conference-video/yapc-eu-2008/you-arent-good-enough/

> There's a reason that programming language
> discussions in the wild Internet are so personal - because they are.

Paul Graham's last essay is exactly about this:
"Keep your identity small" - http://www.paulgraham.com/identity.html

> I chose Catalyst for several reasons.  This active
> mailing list is a big one, the existence of your book was another.  [...]
> Seeing Catalyst mentioned in talks at
> the Open Source conference, seeing it mentioned in blog posts

Spot on, again. When someone language-agnostic makes a decision to use
a web framework, what can they do?
a) try building a sample project in a few different frameworks from
the ~130 out there
b) evaluate what's being *talked about* those frameworks.

People in the a) group are extremely few, and never get far. Take
http://chrislaco.com/articles/ as an example. And of course they don't
get far in objectively evaluating a bunch of frameworks:
- it takes time to learn enough about each framework to know that you
haven't disqualified it due to your own ignorance
- it takes effort to actually build your sample project and iron out the kinks
- once you pick 1 out of N frameworks, most of the knowledge learned
about the other N-1 ones will soon become useless
- sample projects may have little to do with how a framework would
handle real-world complexities and scenarios.

If this isn't a good example of analysis paralysis or the paradox of
choice, I don't know what is.

What will therefore someone who wants to pick a framework most likely do? b).

> I guess, my point is don't utterly give up on the idea of benefits for
> talking about things.

I hope I reinforced that.

Dan