Re: Mach-II

Mach-II calls them listeners - and uses a XML tag to call methods on them. As of release 1.6, Mach-II also supports the publish/subscribe model that Model-Glue uses. On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 9:11 AM, Chad Gray wrote: > > I am studying Model-Glue and MachII by reading the do

Mach-II

I am studying Model-Glue and MachII by reading the docs and presentations. Where are the controllers in MachII? Model-Glue has distinct controllers that tap into the models, I don't see where that happens in MachII. ~| Want t

Re: Model Glue - Fusebox - Mach II ...... Looking for Opinions

On 7/23/07, Jason Fill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think we have pretty much decided that we are going to use ColdSpring to > take care of IoC. So let me throw this out, does any one of the frameworks > lend itself better to the use of ColdSpring, and possible Transfer or Reactor? They all w

Re: Model Glue - Fusebox - Mach II ...... Looking for Opinions

On 7/23/07, Jason Fill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > One concern is that a framework might add too much overhead to the > application because of the use of XML files etc. The only framework any of > the three has worked with is Fusebox(2 thru 5). All three frameworks have a "production" mode whe

Re: Model Glue - Fusebox - Mach II ...... Looking for Opinions

, switching from say Fusebox to Mach-II should only require rewriting the config XML files and slight modifications to the views to support the way Mach-II passes event arguments. You should also be able to hit your model directly from a Flex front end with no (or extremely few) changes required

Re: Model Glue - Fusebox - Mach II ...... Looking for Opinions

of CFCs, with a single ColdSpring config file. The 'Controller' and 'View' layers are done in MG, Mach-II, and Fusebox, allowing you to try it on each one. Really great way of showing that, if written properly, an application can fairly easily port between any framework. E

Re: Model Glue - Fusebox - Mach II ...... Looking for Opinions

Thank you all for the input on this topic. I defiantly think that in the short term and to get started Fusebox would have the smallest learning curve - which would allow us to get going fairly quick. While that is great, our main goal here is to adopt a framework that will be flexible and grow

Re: Model Glue - Fusebox - Mach II ...... Looking for Opinions

> I am looking for several opinions on all these frameworks and any > others. Currently we are trying to figure out which one(s) we need to > focus on evaluating so start a plan to port our current system into a > framework. Our current system is basically a ton of cfincludes with > the data

RE: Model Glue - Fusebox - Mach II ...... Looking for Opinions

Certified Advanced Coldfusion Developer -Original Message- From: Jason Fill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 11:26 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Model Glue - Fusebox - Mach II .. Looking for Opinions I am looking for several opinions on all these frameworks and any other

Re: Model Glue - Fusebox - Mach II ...... Looking for Opinions

If everyone's worked with Fusebox, why not just pick Fusebox? There's always a lot of concern over performance and frameworks -- bluntly, unless you're doing *phenomenal* transaction volume with very tight time tolerances, the framework shouldn't be an issue. Scaling out horizontally or vertically

Re: Model Glue - Fusebox - Mach II ...... Looking for Opinions

On 7/23/07, Jason Fill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for several opinions on all these frameworks and any others. I'm basically in the same boat and have decided to work with Fusebox. I'd love to hear thoughts/experiences on this topic too!

RE: Model Glue - Fusebox - Mach II ...... Looking for Opinions

Glue - Fusebox - Mach II .. Looking for Opinions I am looking for several opinions on all these frameworks and any others. Currently we are trying to figure out which one(s) we need to focus on evaluating so start a plan to port our current system into a framework. Our current system is basically

Model Glue - Fusebox - Mach II ...... Looking for Opinions

I am looking for several opinions on all these frameworks and any others. Currently we are trying to figure out which one(s) we need to focus on evaluating so start a plan to port our current system into a framework. Our current system is basically a ton of cfincludes with the data access disp

SCFUG Meeting : Thursday 19th Oct - Mach-II by Peter J Farrell

Sorry for the short notice on this, but the next Scottish ColdFusion User Group meeting is this Thursday at 8pmBST (GMT+1) via Adobe Connect (Breeze) The topic is Mach-II and the presenter is Peter J Farrell from the CFWeekly podcast. You can find more details on my blog : http

Re: Mach-II Beginner questions

As Matt suggested, join the Mach-II list at Topica which has over 400 subscribers. You'll more than likely get somebody to help you there than on the HoF lists. http://lists.topica.com/lists/mach-ii-coldfusion/ Join by sending a message to or signing up at the above URL: [EMAIL PROT

Re: Mach-II Beginner questions

> Hello - > > I've been a CF developer for years, but I'm having trouble taking the > reigns over for a site built in the Mach-II framework. I could build > what I've been asked to build in Fusebox in 5 minutes, but can't get > Mach-II to listen. > >

Re: Mach-II Beginner questions

> Hello - > > I've been a CF developer for years, but I'm having trouble taking the > reigns over for a site built in the Mach-II framework. I could build > what I've been asked to build in Fusebox in 5 minutes, but can't get > Mach-II to listen. > >

Mach-II Beginner questions

Hello - I've been a CF developer for years, but I'm having trouble taking the reigns over for a site built in the Mach-II framework. I could build what I've been asked to build in Fusebox in 5 minutes, but can't get Mach-II to listen. Before I launch into my question, is th

Re: Changing views at runtime with mach-ii

>Hmm... If mach II doesn't support it, I believe Model-Glue does. I haven't >done any development on these platforms, but I don't think it would be very >difficult to rewrite your app using model-glue if you already have it in >Mach II, as they seem to be pretty simila

RE: Changing views at runtime with mach-ii

Hmm... If mach II doesn't support it, I believe Model-Glue does. I haven't done any development on these platforms, but I don't think it would be very difficult to rewrite your app using model-glue if you already have it in Mach II, as they seem to be pretty similar. Russ

RE: Changing views at runtime with mach-ii

I did not know about the mach-ii list. I was looking for it but must have missed it when looking for mach-ii info. Unfortunately I can't use a simple branch in the logic to solve my problem. I'm attempting to create a dynamic view engine, which would allow me to use a different vie

Re: OT: Changing views at runtime with mach-ii

Rich, I still reccomend posting this to the mach-ii list (especially because I am fairly new to mach-ii) but it hit me as soon as I posted my response that this does't sound like it needs a plugin. This would be similar to how you handle a login - logged in show the home page view , not logg

Re: OT: Changing views at runtime with mach-ii

Rich, I recommend posting this to the mach-ii mailing list. People are quite helpful on that list and it is possible someone has a plugin like that already created. You can join the list through topica at http://lists.topica.com/lists/mach-ii-coldfusion/ - Brian Rinaldi blog - http

RE: Changing views at runtime with mach-ii

Hi Richard, You know that there is a Mach-II mailing list, right? What you need to set up is a branching point in the logic, so that a new event (which creates your desired view) is announced. Most commonly a listener or a filter would do an announcement, but it could also be a plugin. /hugo

OT: Changing views at runtime with mach-ii

Hell all, I'm struggling to find a way to dynamically change a view at runtime in Mach-ii and hoped someone here could point me in the right direction. I've got clients that like to see different views depending on the situation and I was trying to create a plug-in to swap the call

Re: Mach II maxing out

>Out of interest, did you get anywhere with that? Yes, yes - any news? ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:238044 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.house

RE: Mach II maxing out

> -Original Message- > From: Michael Dinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 2:49 PM > > Does anyone know a good reason why a Mach II app would be > maxing out the CPU? No one is hitting the box at all and it's > still hitting 100%.

Re: Mach II maxing out

Micheal, If the MACHII_CONFIG_MODE is set to -1 and the debugging is completely turned off (not filtered by ip), chances are there is nothing wrong with Mach-II, but an infinitely loop, poor code or database problems somewhere. Report back when you get a chance. ...Peter

Re: Mach II maxing out

> Does anyone know a good reason why a Mach II app would be maxing out > the CPU? No one is hitting the box at all and it's still hitting 100%. > Debugging is off. Micheal I know you hate topica lists - but you'll get a better response about mach-ii there since that is whe

Re: Mach II maxing out

t pages are taking so long that it's building > up a lng request queue. There must be a bad setting or something to > cause this and someone who is more knowledgeable in mach II can probably > tell me what it is. A debug setting, non-production setting, etc.I'll be an > expert ton

Re: Mach II maxing out

I spent some time today in the bowels of both the Mach-II and Model-Glue frameworks, and Mach-II itself is really, really lean and mean. It's what some developers do with it that's bloated... -Joe On 4/17/06, Tony <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > its struggling with the fact

Re: Mach II maxing out

Round 2 can go to community. I need tech and this is a tech list. Sorry to be short, but > DING DING, ROUND TWO! > > -Original Message- > From: Tony [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 17 April 2006 19:53 > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Mach II maxing out > >

Re: Mach II maxing out

be a bad setting or something to cause this and someone who is more knowledgeable in mach II can probably tell me what it is. A debug setting, non-production setting, etc.I'll be an expert tonight, but today I'm not. > its struggling with the fact that its overweight, unnecessar

RE: Mach II maxing out

DING DING, ROUND TWO! -Original Message- From: Tony [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 17 April 2006 19:53 To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Mach II maxing out its struggling with the fact that its overweight, unnecessary. sorry, i had to. :) tw On 4/17/06, Michael Dinowitz <[EMAIL PROTEC

Re: Mach II maxing out

Michael Dinowitz wrote: > Does anyone know a good reason why a Mach II app would be maxing out the CPU? > No one is hitting the box at all and it's still hitting 100%. Debugging is > off. if you were running fusionreactor you could see if there were any running requests stuck i

Re: Mach II maxing out

its struggling with the fact that its overweight, unnecessary. sorry, i had to. :) tw On 4/17/06, Michael Dinowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Does anyone know a good reason why a Mach II app would be maxing out the CPU? > No one is hitting the box at all and it's

Mach II maxing out

Does anyone know a good reason why a Mach II app would be maxing out the CPU? No one is hitting the box at all and it's still hitting 100%. Debugging is off. ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:2

OT: selling my private (multi-language) spare time-/event-community for german-language countries (cfmx7,mach-II,rich forms)

&item=8794405726 The description of this auction is in german.. Well, I know this is an english list, but I thought there a so many users who use this list, so maybe there's somebody who may be interested. I developed this project with cfmx7 (OO), used the mach-II-framework and flash-f

Re: Mach-II vs model-glue

> "see the light"... I don't remember if I explicitly mentioned FuseDocs > back then but I did think FLiP was pretty lame (see link above). Like so many other things, detailed use of fusedocs and the FLiP process are really about personal style. I happen to dislike them both, despite a couple hon

Re: Mach-II vs model-glue

On 11/19/05, Barney Boisvert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > To open a can of worms can you elaborate? Most of what I disliked about FB3 is implied in this review of the FB3 book: http://corfield.org/index.cfm/event/fusebox.fusebook > I know some > version-agnostic things about Fusebox (li

Re: Mach-II vs model-glue

eflect that. That necessitates a > fundementally different approach to building the two pieces. That's why I like Model-Glue's declarative result-to-event mapping and the fact that you just include CFML files for views - Mach II's and mechanism seems somewhat artificial to me.

Re: Mach-II vs model-glue

just a different type of listener. That's an area of confusion for a lot of people coming to Mach II: should I use a listener or a filter or a plugin? And, since you can create custom invokers for listeners, it's easy enough to provide the EventContext to a listener and then it *can*

Re: Mach-II vs model-glue

> I was very public about my dislike for FB3 but FB4 began to persuade > me and FB41 is very compelling in my opinion. To open a can of worms can you elaborate? I know some version-agnostic things about Fusebox (like fusedocs) took some persuasion for you to see the light. Surely that w

Re: Mach-II vs model-glue

I agree completely with Barney here and would refer folks to these posts by, respectively, Joe Rinehart and Ben Edwards about the "implicit" part of the invocation process in Mach II: http://clearsoftware.net/client/index.cfm?mode=entry&entry=FFC3E60A-E081-2BAC-69C5B0BD

Re: Mach-II vs model-glue

On 11/19/05, Barney Boisvert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Fusebox 4 was developed specifically for CFMX, and doesn't use OO or > CFCs. Just because it don't have the buzzword compliance doesn't make > a framework bad. Heck, FB3 which was designed for CF4 is still a very > viable framework. Which

Re: Mach-II vs model-glue

On 11/19/05, Snake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have been looking at mach-II and model-glue as my two possibilities. > Has anyone used both and has any comments on which one they liked best and > why. Read my frameworks comparison presentation and look at the frameworks sample

Re: Mach-II vs model-glue

The more important difference in my opinion is that Mach II uses a dynamic event queue whereas Model-Glue uses a static event queue. By that, I mean that in Mach II you can announceEvent(someVariable) and whatever event name is in someVariable will be added to the queue of events to be handled during

Re: Mach-II vs model-glue

> The ability to announce events in listeners is so you can leverage > event-mappings -- which are extremely useful. I certianly agree, and that's really no different that MG's results. But in MG you can ONLY announce results, you can't announce arbitrary events like in M2. Theorectically, you

Re: Mach-II vs model-glue

w if we were all infallible programmers, this wouldn't be an issue. I don't think I see your point. Listeners are "user-defined extensions" of the framework -- they are the glue between Mach-II and your model -- they don't blur the lines of the model or the controller

Re: Mach-II vs model-glue

> The distinguishing factor between M2 and MG for controller code is a name -- > controller (MG) or listener (M2). In essense, they act in the same way. > It's merely a semantic difference IMHO. On that narrow point, yes. ;) MG has the (significant, in my view) advantage that control returns

RE: Mach-II vs model-glue

I personally don't like FB and wouldn't use it. But my own framework is similar in some ways, just a lot simpler. -Original Message- From: Barney Boisvert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 19 November 2005 20:52 To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Mach-II vs model-glue Fusebox 4 was

Re: Mach-II vs model-glue

First off, I know I'm biased -- considering my involvement in the 1.1.0 release of Mach-II. >I happen to like MG better than M2, but it's more of a style thing >than anything about the frameworks themselves. I think MG is more >helpful in distinguishing what is controller cod

Re: Mach-II vs model-glue

it's really primarily a personal style question, unless you're all about the buzzwords. cheers, barneyb On 11/19/05, Snake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have decided it is about to upgrade my framework. While mine still works > great, it was developer prior to MX, so is not oo an

Mach-II vs model-glue

I have decided it is about to upgrade my framework. While mine still works great, it was developer prior to MX, so is not oo and doesn't use CFC's I have been looking at mach-II and model-glue as my two possibilities. Has anyone used both and has any comments on which one they liked be

Mach-II 1.1.0 Ready for download

I am happy to announce that version 1.1.0 of Mach-II is ready for download as well as new documentation from www.mach-ii.com. New Features/Improvements: # Fixed "White Screen Of Death" bug. Mach-II now throws an exception report if the view does not exists instead of showing the &qu

Re: DAO, Gateway, and Manager model for Fusebox and Mach-II

On 8/23/05, wolf2k5 wrote: > I am looking at the sample Fusebox 4.1 OOP application and I am bit > confused about the DAO, Gateway, and Manager model. Also, is it the same as the DAO, Bean and Gateway model? I found a CFC generator for such model, starting from the db tables:

DAO, Gateway, and Manager model for Fusebox and Mach-II

Hi, I am looking at the sample Fusebox 4.1 OOP application and I am bit confused about the DAO, Gateway, and Manager model. Can anyone quicky explain what is it and/or point me in the right direction? Is the same model applicable to Mach-II? Thanks a lot

Re: Fusebox, Mach-II, GlueCode... the Oscar goes to...

I probably should have qualified that a little more. If I develop a "thing" from scratch, and just dive right into coding, it might take two weeks. If I spend time to gather requirements, spec it out, do a good design, and then implement it, it might take 2.5 weeks, and the coding will start afte

Re: Fusebox, Mach-II, GlueCode... the Oscar goes to...

2005/8/11, Barney Boisvert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > I didn't quite understand your question, but I'll try and answer anyway. ;) > > > > Frameworks are just pieces of code to help you do "something" in your > > code. Fusebox, Mach-II, and Model-G

Re: Fusebox, Mach-II, GlueCode... the Oscar goes to...

just pieces of code to help you do "something" in your > code. Fusebox, Mach-II, and Model-Glue are all structure frameworks; > they provide a skeleton from which to hang you application code, and > take care of the "linking stuff together" part. You can have > fr

Re: Fusebox, Mach-II, GlueCode... the Oscar goes to...

I didn't quite understand your question, but I'll try and answer anyway. ;) Frameworks are just pieces of code to help you do "something" in your code. Fusebox, Mach-II, and Model-Glue are all structure frameworks; they provide a skeleton from which to hang you application

Re: Fusebox, Mach-II, GlueCode... the Oscar goes to...

Ok, ok. It depends. Other question: framework and speed dev are the same thing? Or not? I believe(my point of view) that using frameworks make development harder to code. I'm right? It's possible to separate 100% between M V C? Thanx MD 2005/8/11, Barney Boisvert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Same answ

Re: Fusebox, Mach-II, GlueCode... the Oscar goes to...

Same answer: "it depends". In this case it depends on the dev team and their experience, whether you need a 100% separate between UI and application (for multiple UIs) or if a little (or a lot) fudging is ok, etc. There is rarely a simple answer. If you pick one framework and always use it, you'

Re: Fusebox, Mach-II, GlueCode... the Oscar goes to...

> I just think it's great that we have such a choice with > CF. We argue (converse) about which one is BEST! That's > what makes it so powerful. You can be an amateur like me > and code the basics, orrr you can code like lots of > you guys do. > BTW, I don't use any of them. My apps are usuall

Re: Fusebox, Mach-II, GlueCode... the Oscar goes to...

Which method do you recommend for developing a large-scale website/portal? MG >Shrug...I don't think there is one. It depends on what you need. I >wrote Model-Glue, but I'm sitting here using Fusebox because it makes >the most sense for the project I'm working on. > >-Joe > >On 8/10/05, Miche

Re: Fusebox, Mach-II, GlueCode... the Oscar goes to...

I just think it's great that we have such a choice with CF. We argue (converse) about which one is BEST! That's what makes it so powerful. You can be an amateur like me and code the basics, orrr you can code like lots of you guys do. BTW, I don't use any of them. My apps are usually too b

Re: Fusebox, Mach-II, GlueCode... the Oscar goes to...

I'll ditto the "It Depends" comment, and also ditto the Model-Glue recommendation. I'm really digging MG so far. On 8/10/05, Scott Stroz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Model-glue = more gooder. > > Though, I agree with Barney and Joe, the answer really is, 'It depends'. > > On what? Well, the type

Re: Fusebox, Mach-II, GlueCode... the Oscar goes to...

Model-glue = more gooder. Though, I agree with Barney and Joe, the answer really is, 'It depends'. On what? Well, the type of application, what level of OO experience you have, stuff like that. On 8/10/05, Joe Rinehart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Shrug...I don't think there is one. It depe

Re: Fusebox, Mach-II, GlueCode... the Oscar goes to...

Shrug...I don't think there is one. It depends on what you need. I wrote Model-Glue, but I'm sitting here using Fusebox because it makes the most sense for the project I'm working on. -Joe On 8/10/05, Michel Deloux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Personal point of view: choose the best Framework f

Re: Fusebox, Mach-II, GlueCode... the Oscar goes to...

Presumably you were soliciting opinions? For full-app development, ModelGlue would be my choice, I'd say. For UI's, Fusebox 3, hands down. cheers, barneyb On 8/10/05, Michel Deloux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Personal point of view: choose the best Framework for CF. > > Thanks > > MD > --

Fusebox, Mach-II, GlueCode... the Oscar goes to...

Personal point of view: choose the best Framework for CF. Thanks MD ~| Logware (www.logware.us): a new and convenient web-based time tracking application. Start tracking and documenting hours spent on a project or with a clien

Trying to run Mach-II on Windows2003 and CFMX 7

I am getting this error when I try to run a call. This code is running perfect on my Windows2000 server running cfmx 6. Any ideas? The EventContext necessary to announce events is not set in 'request.eventContext.' The error occurred in D:\Inetpub\wwwroot\MachII\framework\BaseComponent.cfc:

Re: mach II or fusebox?

On 6/19/05, Dave Watts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If PLUM's documentation is more comprehensive, whether you're interested in > it or not, your statement is obviously wrong. Having spent some time reading the Plum documentation and comparing it with the onTap documentation, I think I'll stand by

RE: mach II or fusebox?

> Which part of the above is inaccurate? The CHM documentation is not > cross-platform. The Plum IDE is not cross-platform. The framework is > not available separately. Those appear to be true statements. Yes, those are true statements. However, you originally said: "onTap probably has the most c

Re: mach II or fusebox?

> to mention it in the same breath as Fusebox, Model-Glue, Mach II, > > onTap, Reaction... Sorry, but Plum is completely irrelevant to me > > until then since I work exclusively on non-Windows platforms... > > While it may well be irrelevant to you, if you are going to provi

RE: mach II or fusebox?

ged documentation uses a Windows-only format. > > Until the underlying Plum framework is available separately from the > proprietary "IDE" and you provide the documentation in a > cross-platform packaged format, I will find it very hard to remember > to mention it in the same breath

Re: mach II or fusebox?

"CF-Talk" Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 9:21 PM Subject: Re: mach II or fusebox? > > Until the underlying Plum framework is available separately from the > > proprietary "IDE" > > Maybe there's room for the Plum developers to more clearly separate > t

Re: framework documentation (was Re: mach II or fusebox?)

>> > onTap probably has the most comprehensive documentation >> > of any of the frameworks out there. >> Thank you Sean, I really appreciate that... > Just as an aside, they really are great docs. > Good job Isaac, and thanks for setting an > example for the rest of us to try to follow. Thanks J

Re: framework documentation (was Re: mach II or fusebox?)

> > onTap probably has the most comprehensive documentation > > of any of the frameworks out there. > Thank you Sean, I really appreciate that... Just as an aside, they really are great docs. Good job Isaac, and thanks for setting an example for the rest of us to try to follow. -- Get Glued!

Re: mach II or fusebox?

> Until the underlying Plum framework is available separately from the > proprietary "IDE" Maybe there's room for the Plum developers to more clearly separate the Plum IDE from the framework - from what I know, the IDE generates a "project" XML file from which code is generated. If Productivity

Re: framework learning curve (was Re: mach II or fusebox?)

gt; be using onTap. > Cheers Thanks Greg, I just had a glance at the MG quickstart and I'll bookmark this for reference. Joe does seem to have done a good job of dividing the tasks and providing them in rather short bits... Most of them seem to be pretty specific to "traditional" eve

Re: framework learning curve (was Re: mach II or fusebox?)

HI Isaac, been wanting to try onTap for a while, lots of neat stuff in there, as a 'newbie' to onTap (most of my work is in Fusebox, facry and mG) , I'd like to see shorter task based tutorials, the 18 minute preso is great for an introduction (maybe trim some of the fat out and move it to a diffe

framework debugging (was: framework learning curve (was Re: mach II or fusebox?)

On 6/17/05, S. Isaac Dealey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The latest versions of the framework also display a list of > directories in which files are being executed along with CF's debug > output at the bottom of the page, which should help people get the > hang of figuring out what code is executi

Re: mach II or fusebox?

sion Developers * ColdFusion MX Master Class * Advanced Development with CFMX and SQL Server 2000 - Original Message - From: "John Paul Ashenfelter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 9:08 PM Subject: Re: mach II or fusebox? >

Re: mach II or fusebox?

t your packaged documentation uses a Windows-only format. Until the underlying Plum framework is available separately from the proprietary "IDE" and you provide the documentation in a cross-platform packaged format, I will find it very hard to remember to mention it in the same breath

Re: mach II or fusebox?

> From: "dave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Talk" > Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 5:42 PM > Subject: Re: mach II or fusebox? > > > > Adam, I loved Plum when I was on beta but.. > > > > things changed and it wa

Re: mach II or fusebox?

- Original Message - From: "Sean Corfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > onTap probably has the most comprehensive documentation of any of the > frameworks out there. Check out http://www.fusiontap.com/ ... Sean, Take a look at Plum's extensive documentation: http://www.productivityenhancement.

Re: framework learning curve (was Re: mach II or fusebox?)

> Well, I made it about half-way through the preso before I > downloaded > the files and started playing. And, I made it about > halfway through > the hello world demo before I got sick of creating > directories (but I > got the concept). > So, here's a question that I haven't been able to answer

framework documentation (was Re: mach II or fusebox?)

architecture, the supporting website really puts Fusebox, > Mach II and Model-Glue to shame (no offence intended to > any of those folks). Thank you Sean, I really appreciate that... It's ironic because the public site isn't kept up to date nearly as much as I'd like.

RE: framework learning curve (was Re: mach II or fusebox?)

> I might offer up that these programmers may not > necessarily have short attention spans, but rather we want > to jump in and try coding. > You may be better served with some step by step type > tutorials that basic give a step, let them play awhile, > then give the next step Well the three peo

Re: framework learning curve (was Re: mach II or fusebox?)

Well, I made it about half-way through the preso before I downloaded the files and started playing. And, I made it about halfway through the hello world demo before I got sick of creating directories (but I got the concept). So, here's a question that I haven't been able to answer in the last 20 m

RE: framework learning curve (was Re: mach II or fusebox?)

k learning curve (was Re: mach II or fusebox?) > I feel the same way, but even more so. I've looked at the > examples on the ontap site and feel like the learning curve > is about like | while I've been able to pickup fusebox & > mach-ii & mg fai

framework learning curve (was Re: mach II or fusebox?)

> I feel the same way, but even more so. I've looked at the > examples on the ontap site and feel like the learning curve > is about like | while I've been able to pickup fusebox & > mach-ii & mg fairly easy with a learning curve more like / Yep... I've heard

previous onTap presentations (was Re: mach II or fusebox?)

> actually I think there was already a breeze preso that > Isaac did...not sure if it was recorded or not. > Ike? There've been two... Neither of them went as well as I'd hoped. :P The first one was a private presentation to 40 or so people (better attendance than I'd expected), all of them CFUG

upcoming onTap presentations (was Re: mach II or fusebox?)

> Maybe you could do a Breeze presentation on onTap some > time in Sean's Breeze room? I'm a Fusebox guy at heart, > but am always interested in learning about other > frameworks (I like both Mach-II and Model-Glue). However, > the example you provided there just confu

Re: mach II or fusebox?

s and so on. No matter what anyone might think of the actual framework / architecture, the supporting website really puts Fusebox, Mach II and Model-Glue to shame (no offence intended to any of those folks). -- Sean A Corfield -- http://corfield.org/ Team Fusebox -- http://fusebox.org/ Got Gmail? --

Re: mach II or fusebox?

I feel the same way, but even more so. I've looked at the examples on the ontap site and feel like the learning curve is about like | while I've been able to pickup fusebox & mach-ii & mg fairly easy with a learning curve more like / I think it might be that I need a video tu

Re: mach II or fusebox?

t heart, but am always interested in learning about > other frameworks (I like both Mach-II and Model-Glue). However, the example > you provided there just confused me...if anything it made it look like onTap > is quite complicated and difficult to understand. Since it's probably just >

Re: mach II or fusebox?

Maybe you could do a Breeze presentation on onTap some time in Sean's Breeze room? I'm a Fusebox guy at heart, but am always interested in learning about other frameworks (I like both Mach-II and Model-Glue). However, the example you provided there just confused me...if anything it ma

RE: mach II or fusebox?

> > How would you feel if we could get Plum working with MySQL > > under Mono? > > The UI is likely to be the biggest problem since that's the least > portable part of a .NET app at the moment. GTK+ has become the defacto standard for graphical Mono apps by the look of things. -- Damien McKenn

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >