[vaporstun]

> Your comments comparing Rails and Drupal surprises me. I feel like you are writing without realizing how Rails development is done.

First, no offense taken.

Next, I do have a fair amount of experience developing in Rails (it's my go-to hobby framework and I MUCH prefer developing in it to Drupal as I thought I imparted in my original comment) and yes, there are gems that get you most of the way there with some of the tasks I described, but our site builders (read: non-developers) are unfamiliar with the command line, could not generally install gems without intervention from developers and, if necessary, could not extend them without developer intervention. That is what I'm trying to describe.

With Drupal, people who interact only with a web browser can install rich components from a library of modules developed by others with integration with the Content Types (basically the equivalent of Rails Models in Drupal) with zero development.

Looking back at my original comment, arguably my time estimates for development were exaggerated to some extent and could be shortened with the use of gems, but the fact remains there is, at current, no way for users, through only a web browser, to enable that kind of rich functionality in Rails. That was the point I was trying to get across.

You don't have to write much code but you still have to write code. This makes it a non-starter for a particular class of user.