You have it exactly backwards, Brian. Adam accused the Open Source cfml community of being abusive toward Adobe.
And I quote from Adam: "The "open CF" side of the community couldn't be more abusive towards Adobe. It's laughable to think that the community holding the OS vendors accountable would make someone leave CF." I called Adam out on this statement and will continue to do so. The Railo and CFEclipse lists, at least, are quite far from abusive toward Adobe. I do not monitor the OpenBD lists, so perhaps there is something going on there that I am unaware of. But the accusation of abuse came from Adam, not the other way around. Judah On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Brian Kotek <[email protected]> wrote: > > What are we actually debating, again? The original issue at the root of all > this was that Adobe is being "abusive" to the OSS engines. Highlighting the > competitive advantages that Adobe feels they have over Railo or OpenBD, or > the negative impact they feel it those engines have on the Adobe or CF > community, is not abuse. It is exactly what competitors do. Everyone is free > to agree or disagree with what Adobe is saying. But to call it "abuse" > reveals, at best, a lack of understanding of what the word means, and at > worst, an intentional misrepresentation. > > I keep asking for some examples of the horrible abuse that Adobe (or anyone, > really) are directing at the OSS engines, but no one seems to be bothering > to provide any. > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:341745 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/unsubscribe.cfm
