RE: A suggestion for FuseBox viability. . .

[JME Maxwell]

I agree completely.   JME -----Original Message----- From: Nate Nielsen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 4:51 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: A suggestion for FuseBox viability. . . A suggestion for FuseBox.  Seperate it -   Official FuseBox Methodology  -  Methodologies can be contained in a document and require no files.  They explore best practices for approaching common development tasks.   Official FuseBox Framework - This is basically what FB3 is.  It can require files, and take care of issues on a coding level.  You can add the handling of errors and exceptions and other widgets.  Most importantly, it can cater to specific languages.   I think many people are turned off by the fact that the FuseBox methodology is now a framework.  This also makes it impossible to actually port FB as a methodology over to other languages like ASP and JSP.   I think if the "FB Steer" folks got back to the basics of developing FuseBox as a methodology, and framework for those interested in it, -seperately- you would see many doors open to expanding FB concept on a much larger scale.   And no, I don't think this post belongs in community, and therefore - I will not take it there.   =)   Everyone's thoughts on this?     Nate Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]       ==^================================================================ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bUrFMa.bV0Kx9 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^================================================================