Does batteries included somehow result in upgrading years old projects being a larger lift? I would think the opposite.

thedanbob an hour ago | parent | next [-]

My experience has been the opposite, especially since Rails has included more batteries over the years. You need fewer non-Rails-default dependencies than ever, and the upgrade process has gotten easier every major version.

	▲	dmix an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Rails is way more stable and mature these days. Keeping up to date is definitely easier. Probably 10x easier than a Node/JS project which will have far more churn.

▲

Lukas_Skywalker 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I also think it's the opposite, since the dependencies are almost guaranteed to be compatible with each other. And I think Ruby libraries in particular are usually quite stable and maintained for a long time.

▲

f311a 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

My medium-sized Django projects had close to 100 dependencies, and when you want to update to a new Django version, the majority of them must be updated too.

Thankfully, updating to a new Django version is usually simple. It does not require many code changes.

But finding small bugs after an update is hard, unless you have very good test coverage. New versions of middleware/Django plugins often behave slightly differently, and it's hard to keep track of all the changes when you have so many dependencies.

	▲	4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]