I have to agree. My 1st impression: "wtf?" My 2nd impression: "Ah, ok that makes a lot of sense"
;) -----Original Message----- From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 1:39 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Mach II On Tuesday, Jul 29, 2003, at 10:17 US/Pacific, Ben Densmore wrote: > I've looked at it real quick. It is definitely different from previous > versions of fusebox. Well, it isn't Fusebox at all. Hence the name change. If you want an evolution of Fusebox 3, look at Fusebox 4. That's still a pipes & filters architecture and, for the most part, much more familiar to existing Fuseboxers. Mach II is a totally different approach - once you get the hang of it, it's actually pretty straightforward... Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
