CF 10 feels like a dot release to me. Additional comments below: On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Alex Skinner <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think the mod to createobject for the java loader I'd like to see in > fact I believe that's already been a feature request for a while made sense > waiting to see how acf was going to do it. > Haven't looked into all the details of CF 10 but the ability to specify a JAR from which to create an object has been in OpenBD for a while now: http://www.openbd.org/manual/?/function/createobject Frankly ever since JavaLoader was created years ago I never understood the need for it unless you're on shared hosting and can't add JAR files yourself. Always felt like a hack solution to an artificial "problem" to me, but maybe I'm missing some legitimate use case. > > Once the web socket stuff beds in that also might be interesting. > This is about the only feature I looked at and thought was compelling. (Side note, in CF 10 they throttle this functionality unless you buy Enterprise.) I was semi-intrigued by the REST stuff but the implementation is quite poor IMO. The REST functionality built into Mach-II is a far better implementation. I'd be curious though if people are interested in that feature or not. I personally don't see a need for closures, other than for compatibility (and it remains to be seen if people will actually use these much). The enhancements to the scheduling engine are interesting -- they simply wrapped up Quartz for this (and it's only available in Enterprise). Might be interesting to look into that. Client side stuff like charting I'm on the fence about but since cfchart is already in the mix I think it might be cool to give that an overhaul. There's lots of very slick open source HTML5 charting libraries out there. I'd still like to see cfimage get an overhaul to tie into ImageMagick; that seems like low-hanging fruit that I might even be able to take a stab at myself. ;-) I'd also like to see the ability to write command-line CFML scripts, but not sure if I'm in the minority on that one. Generally speaking as far as next steps for OpenBD I think it's the full-script syntax in CFCs simply for compatibility purposes, and tightening the screws down in a couple other areas. BUT ... main point is WE need to hear from YOU about what you want to see in future versions of OpenBD. We're always cooking up new ideas of our own but ultimately we want to know how we can best serve you, so never be afraid to speak up or ask for things that don't exist yet. That's how we keep moving things forward and keep meeting your needs. -- Matthew Woodward [email protected] http://blog.mattwoodward.com identi.ca / Twitter: @mpwoodward Please do not send me proprietary file formats such as Word, PowerPoint, etc. as attachments. http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html -- online documentation: http://openbd.org/manual/ http://groups.google.com/group/openbd?hl=en
