Hi Ed, Yes, there are "serious plans for further development" of OpenBD on GAE, and I've been following your messages with considerable interest. However, Matt McGinty and I--the two main developers of OpenBD/GAE so far--are taking a bit of a break for the next few months for two reasons:
1) We're busy preparing the next commercial release of BD.NET; see my two most recent blog entries (http://blog.newatlanta.com/) to see exactly what we're working on. We're planning to release a Visual Studio 2010 CFML editor plug-in by the end of June (it will be free--as in beer--but not open source). 2) The GAE platform itself is still very much in a state of flux. Rather that trying to keep up with a moving target, we'd like to see it mature a bit before we plunge back in. I don't think you're wasting your time--I expect the investigation you've done so far will significantly influence our future development when we pick things back up. Vince Bonfanti New Atlanta Communications, LLC On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 10:33 AM, Edward Smith <[email protected]>wrote: > Baz, thanks! > > I've been reading about alternate GAE datastore frameworks, such as > Objectify (http://code.google.com/p/objectify-appengine/) and Twig > (http://code.google.com/p/twig-persist/) which intend to make the low- > level API be a bit more approachable especially in transparently > mapping datamodels to GAE entities, but without the full abstraction > of JDO. > > Sound kinda familar - that's pretty much what OpenBD's doing here as > well. > > Not sure if the OpenBD crew's interested in tying this product to one > of these frameworks, but it might give a significant boost to the > velocity of the project. > > At any rate, I found a great thread that includes posts from the > developers of both these frameworks, which compare and contrast the > philosophies between the two. > > > http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java/browse_thread/thread/f20d922ffecb310c > > I'm not sure what the roadmap for OpenBD looks like, or even how > serious the group is taking this branch of the product. > > I'd guess that the real goal would be for a platform independent > implementation of "ORM" such that an app would be as portable as > possible between an ORM-equipped (hopefully ACF-complaint) version of > OpenBD on J2EE, and the GAE version, but I'm wondering if that might > compromise the performance or scalability of the GAE version. > > Perhaps a blend of both, in that you can just use the hibernate- > derived ORM syntax, but also have access to a more powerful, lower- > level GAE specific implementation as well. > > Anyway, thanks for listening. > > I would love, if you have time, some sort of response from the OpenBD > team about any of this, just to try to understand if I'm wasting my > time here or if there are serious plans for further development. > > Thanks! > > Ed. > > -- Open BlueDragon Public Mailing List http://www.openbluedragon.org/ http://twitter.com/OpenBlueDragon mailing list - http://groups.google.com/group/openbd?hl=en !! save a network - please trim replies before posting !!
