First off, this portion of the discussion probably belongs on cf-community.
There is a whole 'nother portion that I, like Charlie, think should be discussed "technically" (or constructively). I applaud the folks doing so. On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 6:27 PM, Paul Hastings wrote: > > On 1/31/2011 3:05 PM, denstar wrote: > ... >> My overall point was that surely there's *some* non-zero number of >> people trying/using coldfusion that wouldn't before, if not just >> because of the fact that it was a closed architecture. > > you have no proof of that. by your logic i can equally say that having "open" > architecture drove away as many as it attracted. a "way of thinking" is not > facts, that's another form of woo. All I have is educated guesses. Does it seem more logical to you that folks would abandon a good language because there was an open source variant? ... >> I'd rather have the coder. Even if CFML gives one coder the strength >> of ten. =) > > yeah i guess if you can grab a decent coder for the price of a cf license. but > that's not even remotely true. And that's not what I said. If I'm incorrect, at least let me be incorrect about what I was talking about. :) >> Having open source engine alternatives is more ammo for folks fighting >> for CFML use, hands down. > > "ammo" doesn't mean squat if it's not used to hit what you're supposed to be > aiming at. The public numbers I've seen look good. You keep telling me about how you're on the inside, and what I see in not the reality, but all I have is your word. Or woo, if you prefer. :) And it only seems to be focused more on Adobe than CFML. Are we talking about different things? >> How someone could see this as bad for the language, or us, as coders >> in said language, is beyond me. > > it's been explained to you over & over. you even acknowledged it & said you > didn't care (on twitter). Ugh. :) You said something that sounded like hearsay, and I said even it it were true, I felt that open source alternatives were good for the language. >> muckity-mucks gainfully employed. It's almost like a club or separate >> ecosystem. > > those other parts are but a cf developer there is just as important to the cf > community as a cf developer in a small shop. btw i don't see *you* declaring > some vow of poverty, so might as well stop with these kinds of comparisons > until > you do. Heh. I guess if I lied and called it intentional... ;) >> where the Real Money is made anyways. In The Enterprise. > > why do you think "enterprise" is some kind of swear word? we built > "enterprise" > level systems for municipalities here that helped increase their tax rolls (by > helping make everybody who was supposed to pay taxes, actually pay them) & > silly > little things like track school kid vaccinations. the tax justice we helped > with > allowed those cities to buy more "toys" like fire trucks & have more money to > "waste" on things like parks & youth programs. Not at all. Didn't you watch that South Park episode? Enterprise ain't evil. Hell, it's the name of a mighty fine starship. >> And to be clear, I'm not knocking Adobe. I'm not saying that they > > some of your previous remarks kind of sound like that. You can be pro X without implying anti Y. I can't control how you see what I type, but I've tried to type stuff that's pro-CFML, regardless of who's behind it, and emotion, belief, etc.. ... > sure but 99.99% of developers aren't going to go that deep or need to. and > from > what i've seen w/other OS projects some of the stuff produced from that 0.01% > shouldn't be touched w/a 10 foot pole. You think some of that can be bad, you should see my closed-source stuff. =) ... >> Why the venom? Even if that was the case, I'd still cheer my heart out. > > statements of facts are not in & of themselves venomous. why fall back to that > as an argument? I wasn't arguing, I was hinting that we don't *really* need to be angry in our conversation. >> Do you have so little faith in the language? > > more nonsense from you. try again. I worded it harshly, but I really don't understand the idea that good ideas need huge corporations behind them to be successful in the ways that matter. >> I don't. I know you say it's not true, but I haven't seen the >> evidence. Can you clue me in to anything solid? > > you acknowledged this on twitter & said you didn't care. remember? I remember saying that even if what you said you'd heard through the back channels was true, I would still be happy we ended up with an open source engine out of the deal. That does not make what you said you heard true and non-woo. Do you have any data? I asked on twitter too. ... >> Whatever you want to believe, I think it's a happier world with open >> source CFML engines. > > i would agree if they were bringing in new developers instead of munching on > the > cf community's liver. Do you have some kind of numbers to back up this claim that open source engines *aren't* bringing new people into the fold? Looking at mailing list traffic, and other non-direct indicators, what are you seeing? >> Have you even looked at the open source engines? They're pretty swell. > > yes i have indeed. so what? Sheesh. :) They're pretty swell, that's what. With great communities. They reflect highly on the language, IMHO. I don't think we'll be screwed if we don't have a corporation selling an engine, like we would have been before. We would have been S.O.L. before. And I don't like being SOL. I'm a naturally lucky guy. Looking at things positively (while being prepared for, and perhaps even expecting, the worst) is as real as the alternative. There is a slight chance that belief, and even how we perceive things, effects "reality". I'm not making it up, I swear! >> having money, or caring but getting bought out. > > as i said you already know the reasons for me having issues w/the way railo is > doing things. who's going to take over if adobe buys out railo? what happens > to > railo's customers in practice? they just might be the ones getting stuck > w/stagnant s/w. As I said, I know that you told me that somebody told you something about Railo. :) Even given your scenario, that's totally ignoring OpenBD, which is quite awesome as well. What about them? What about me? I'm not scared of any software, and have a knack for getting it to do what I want. Sometimes it takes a while, but I'm not just going to give up when the power to make things the way I want them to be is right there in front of me. >> If you want to see it that way, you can. I don't, but who am I to say? > > a "fanboy" ;-) what's good for the goose is good for the gander. I freely admit that I am a fan of open source software. I've tried to grow out of seeing things cut and dry though-- open source == good, closed source == bad. Big business == good, small business == bad. Etc.. Look, we're all in this together, whether we like it or not. Let's see how awesome we can get it, whatever it is. I honestly believe we can mostly be mostly happy. >> l think it will all work out for the best in the end (and I have proof!). > > no you don't. Yes, I do. Things are pretty swell already. :) :DeN* -- Man was born free, and he is everywhere in chains. Jean-Jacque ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| 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:341780 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/unsubscribe.cfm
