Yes, the author of the article (Patrick Steil) is the president of
Infrastructure, the creator iiFramework. I know Patrick; he's the
president of our CFUG (Dallas/Fort Worth)
However, I would not look at the article as a pro/con for Fusebox.
iiFramework is a framework (obviously), whereas FuseBox is a
methodology. Patrick did a good job in one of our meetings in pointing
out the difference between methodologies and frameworks; his point was
that developers need frameworks, not just methodology. However, I don't
believe he means to take a stance against a particular methodology; as a
matter of fact, iiFramework integrates several Fusebox principles into
the framework.
-Billy Cravens
Bob Silverberg wrote:
>
> Personally, I'd take that article with a grain of salt. It seems to smile
> very kindly on iiFramework, to the detriment of the other methodologies -
> and I believe that it was written by the president of the company that is
> selling iiFramework.
>
> I don't mean to cast any aspersions on that individual, but I think it's bad
> form on CFDJ's part. I would expect an article that portrays itself as a
> review to be at least somewhat unbiased. It is hard to remain unbiased when
> you stand to gain financially if one of the methodologies reviewed is chosen
> by the reader.
>
> Just my 2 cents,
> Bob
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Neil Peaslee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: January 8, 2001 10:00 AM
> To: Fusebox
> Subject: RE: arguments **against** fusebox
>
> Rob,
> There is a good article that compares different cold fusion application
> frameworks (and fusebox as a methodology) in sys-con's ColdFusion
> Developer's Journal. The article list pros and cons of each
> framework/methodology.
>
> You can find the article at http://www.sys-con.com/coldfusion/
> Just go to 'featured articles' in the left column and then click on the
> article titled 'Propel Your ColdFusion Projects with Application Frameworks'
> in Volume: 2 Issue: 11.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rob Schuff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 1:01 PM
> > To: Fusebox
> > Subject: arguments **against** fusebox
> >
> >
> > Greetings folks,
> >
> > As a newcomer to CF and even newer to fusebox I am seeking all the info I
> > can possibly digest. Fusebox certainly looks like a solid
> > methodology, but
> > like anyone reviewing such a methodology, I would like to see
> > "both sides of
> > the coin". Can anyone point me to criticisms/ perceived weaknesses (valid
> > or not) of FB?
> >
> >
> > thanks
> >
> > rob
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Robert Schuff Bull Run Software
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Portland, OR USA
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
