Thank you for writing in with your concerns.

First, I want to assure you that Bridgetown 2.0 development progress is proceeding at a pretty rapid clip at this point, so I’m very excited about how the release is shaping up. I don’t see the upgrade having much disruption on existing projects…many of my own projects are now running on HEAD. So if anything, this set of decision-making has actually accelerated the forward momentum of the framework, not slowed it down.

I want to address Bridgetown being a “marketing website framework for Rails developers”. That’s actually never been a goal of the framework: Bridgetown has been both a static-site generator and fullstack framework for some time now, and we’re going to lean hard into hybrid deployment opportunities where it’s a complete solution.

Perhaps the most relevant point though, and I regret if my article didn’t make this obvious, is that it’s likely I would not be working on the framework any longer if these core vision steps weren’t taken. There are many other frameworks I take a particular interest in these days, most notably Astro as a worthy competitor to Bridgetown. I choose to continue wanting to work on Bridgetown and Ruby in general because of the community around the language…which at this point is fundamentally at odds with what I see coming out of the top leadership of the Rails ecosystem. You’re welcome to disagree with that perspective.

At the end of the day, although I make a very modest sum from some generous contributors on GitHub sponsors, Bridgetown is truly a labor of love. Our revised vision for the future of the framework ensures that I will continue to provide this labor for a long time to come, to the best of my ability. I hope you’ll be able to support that.

Thanks -J