Yeah all I know is what I see in the news..."HELL NO WE WONT GO"
Douglas Brown Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Heald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 12:03 AM Subject: RE: Fusebox (was: I like CFMX) > Someone on another list I subscribe to has as his signature saying: > > "The only good things to ever come from Berkley were BSD Unix and LSD" > > Haven't been there so I wouldn't know if anything else good came from there > :) > > Tim Heald > ACP/CCFD > Application Development > www.schoollink.net > > -----Original Message----- > From: Douglas Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 3:07 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Fusebox (was: I like CFMX) > > > Berkeley... Is it true that most people from that school is flower > sniffing tree huggers? I heard a saying once > > "LSD and Linux BSD both came from Berkeley, this cannot be a > coincidence" > > > > > Douglas Brown > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jennifer Larkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 11:50 PM > Subject: RE: Fusebox (was: I like CFMX) > > > > Living in California, where it's 11:50. Although I do have to > get up > > awfully early to take public transportation to Berkeley, so I > should be > > going to bed soon. > > > > At 02:25 AM 4/30/02 -0400, you wrote: > > >I do have to say this, irregardless of what "side" you may be > on where this > > >is concerned, I have to admire the dedication that all of you > have for > > >ColdFusion. Here it is 3 am in the morning, and still going > strong. I know > > >I am working on the MM XML Feed thing using CFMX. What, aside > from this > > >conversation keeps the rest of you up this evening? > > > > > >Tim Heald > > >ACP/CCFD > > >Application Development > > >www.schoollink.net > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > >From: Hal Helms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > >Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 2:23 AM > > >To: CF-Talk > > >Subject: RE: Fusebox (was: I like CFMX) > > > > > > > > >Jennifer, I'm unclear about the reference to URL vars, which > Fusebox is > > >completely agnostic about. It does view the application as a > single > > >entity that responds to different method requests, though. > Those method > > >requests come to the fusebox as variables. Is that what you > don't like? > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > >From: Jennifer Larkin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > >Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 1:50 AM > > >To: CF-Talk > > >Subject: Re: Fusebox (was: I like CFMX) > > > > > > > > >Lets assume that it teaches people incorrect definitions for > standard > > >terminology. This is Matt's viewpoint. Since I am familiar with > Matt, I > > >can > > >tell you that the guy *does* know what he's talking about. He > doesn't > > >always say it in the most understandable or helpful way, nor > does he > > >explain things that he thinks you should already know, but he > knows what > > > > > >he's talking about. So for the sake of answering your question, > let's > > >assume that none of us question the validity of that part of > Matt's > > >stance. > > > > > >That does affect it's quality and may affect it's usefulness. > You see, > > >when > > >you learn the weird definition, you aren't able to communicate > > >effectively > > >with people who know the standard definition. If two people on > the same > > >project are unable to communicate, that does affect > productivity, making > > >it > > >less useful than it would be if it used the correct > definitions. In this > > > > > >case, knowing the standard definitions might help you become a > better > > >programmer, which means that you are being done a disservice by > being > > >told > > >the wrong definition. Again, it would therefore be more useful > to you if > > >it > > >gave you the correct definition. > > > > > >It certainly doesn't change how FuseBox works, but that doesn't > preclude > > >a > > >change in usefulness. > > > > > >And about getting around the url variable problem. The way I > described, > > >I > > >don't have to get around the URL variable problem but I still > get the > > >usefulness. Creating what I see as a problem and then solving > it is not > > >as > > >good as not creating the problem in the first place. > > > > > >At 12:49 AM 4/30/02 -0400, you wrote: > > > >So whether some people call it a methodology, others a > framework, > > > >others a > > > >standard, are you saying that changes it's > > > >usefulness? > > > > > > > >Steve > > > > > > > >Matt Liotta wrote: > > > > > > > > > Since I first saw Fusebox, its web site as well as some of > its > > > > > proponents like Steve and Nat have termed it as among > other things, > > > > > an architecture, an application framework, a methodology, > and more > > > > > recently a standard. About the only term remotely related > to Fusebox > > > > > > > > is methodology. > > > > > > > > > > -Matt > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Hal Helms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > > Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 9:24 PM > > > > > > To: CF-Talk > > > > > > Subject: RE: Fusebox (was: I like CFMX) > > > > > > > > > > > > I certainly wouldn't want to do that any more than you > would, > > > > > > Matt. > > > > > I'm > > > > > > not sure what you're referring to, though. > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 12:16 AM > > > > > > To: CF-Talk > > > > > > Subject: RE: Fusebox (was: I like CFMX) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Indeed, more power to you for helping people. But, do > you have to > > > > > > use common programming terms incorrectly? Showing people > > > > > > techniques is one thing, but to show a technique and > pass it off > > > > > > as something it is not, certainly isn't helpful the > person or the > > > > > > community in general. > > > > > > > > > > > > -Matt > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: Hal Helms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 9:12 PM > > > > > > > To: CF-Talk > > > > > > > Subject: RE: Fusebox (was: I like CFMX) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree there's no formal specification, Dave. We're > all working > > > > > > > > > > developers and though people contribute enormously to > spreading > > > > > > Fusebox, > > > > > > > we haven't created a formal spec. That may come at > some point, > > > > > > > but > > > > > > most > > > > > > > of our efforts are focused on helping people learn use > Fusebox > > > > > > > to achieve successful software projects. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In response to your question to Steve, Tim Heald asked > us to > > > > > > > respond > > > > > > to > > > > > > > some Fusebox talk on the CF-List. I'm happy to try to > help, but > > > > > > > I > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > > > that some folks have an animus against Fusebox that I > can't help > > > > > with. > > > > > > > > > > > > > In short, if I can offer info, I will but I respect > your time > > > > > > > too > > > > > much > > > > > > > > > > > > > to waste it trying to convert you. Besides, my take on > this is > > > > > > > that we're all in this together, Fuseboxers and > non-Fuseboxers > > > > > > > alike. We share a common goal and a common love for > creative > > > > > > > programming. A > > > > > lot > > > > > > of > > > > > > > people have found Fusebox helpful; some people don't. > Let a > > > > > > > thousand flowers bloom, as the Chinese say. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 11:54 PM > > > > > > > To: CF-Talk > > > > > > > Subject: RE: Fusebox (was: I like CFMX) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are two books coming out on Fusebox that > should help > > > > > > > > > > > > > to alleviate the lack of available information > on exactly > > > > > > > > > > what Fusebox is. John Quarto and I wrote one > called > > > > > > > > > > "Discovering Fusebox 3" and Jeff Peters/Nat > Papovich wrote > > > > > > > > > > > > > one for New > > > > > > Riders. > > > > > > > > > > That will help people who want to find out for > themselves > > > > > > > > > > what Fusebox is all about. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, hi, Hal! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's nice and all, but where's the definitive > > > > > > > > > specification? I don't have to shell out for that, > do I? It > > > > > > > > > doesn't have to be stimulating reading, it just > has to be a > > > > > > > > > specification. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.fusebox.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=learn.specificatio > > > > > > > > n > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > CF and PHP are there, JSP is coming pretty soon. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, hi to you too Steve! What did they do, ring the > alarm bell > > > > > > > > > > at fusebox.org? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I went there, before posting the previous post, and > there's > > > > > > > nothing there which is a specification. There are some > > > > > > > implementations, > > > > > > there's > > > > > > > some documentation, but no specification in the formal > sense. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software > http://www.figleaf.com/ > > > > > > > voice: (202) 797-5496 > > > > > > > fax: (202) 797-5444 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________________ > ____ > > Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official > book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm > > FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq > > Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ > > Unsubscribe: > http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists > > > > > __________________________________________________________________ ____ > Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm > FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq > Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ > Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists > ______________________________________________________________________ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
