I don't know how could anyone possible upgrade to CFMX from CF 5. If you ran one site and thoroughly tested it maybe, but in a larger environment its pure suicide. There are pages and pages of differences between CF 5 and CFMX and things just aren't backwards compatible.
Neil ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lee Fuller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 1:30 PM Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF! > OH yeah.. I completely agree. > > And (using hind-sight, which of course is ALWAYS 20/20) it would have > been better to keep CFMX on the newer boxes only, and not upgrade any > others. Moving customers who wish to use the new functionality (with > full disclosure and disclaimers) as they will. > > Oh well.. <sigh>... > > > | -----Original Message----- > | From: Rob Rohan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > | Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 10:08 AM > | To: CF-Talk > | Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF! > | > | > | Hi Lee, > | Your point is well taken, I was a bit bummed that some > | of our existing code didn't work too. I have to differ with > | you a bit though. > | > | Internet languages (html, javascript, etc) are awful > | sloppy. It makes them hard to read/debug. Coming from a > | C/Java stand point they are too forgiving. If you look at the > | trend of the internet (xhtml, xml, etc), you'll notice that > | code tightening is where we are going. > | > | Code often runs better when it is uniform, predictable, > | and structured. > | > | It's a bit painful, but I think it will help cf run > | faster, among other things. > | > | > | -----Original Message----- > | From: Lee Fuller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > | Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 9:54 AM > | To: CF-Talk > | Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF! > | > | > | Hey Stace! > | > | I understand. And with this, it's most likely the same type of issue. > | > | One of the things, however, that sticks in my craw (as it > | were) was that during the months leading up to CFMX's > | release, we were told OVER and OVER again that existing code > | would work well in CFMX, with little, if any, changes. I > | heard that bell ring in the tower more than 20 times, that I > | can count on one hand. <grin> > | > | Yet here we are with "locking causes this", "change code to > | do this or that", "fix up the code". Uhm... ? So am I to > | believe that the chant > | was false? Telling my clients to go back and "fix" their > | code is like > | saying.. > | > | "Uhm.. Sorry you can't park that car here, it's BLUE!" > | "But you told me to paint it blue!?!?" > | "I know, but now we're back to only RED cars. Sorry.. > | Go paint it BLUE!" > | > | It's more than just an "inconvenience", to say the least. If > | I switch back to 5, all the touting I did about CFMX's > | behavior and power was for naught. And even worse, many of > | the CF clients may just opt for ASP, PHP, etc., just cuz they > | don't believe me telling them "Well.. But don't worry, it'll > | be fixed. Really!" > | > | > | | -----Original Message----- > | | From: Stacy Young [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > | | Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 9:33 AM > | | To: CF-Talk > | | Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF! > | | > | | > | | Hi Lee, > | | > | | Out of 3 incidents I've opened relating to CFMX..I only got > | dinged for > | | 1 of 'em...cause it was an environment issue on our end. > | | > | | Cheers, > | | > | | Stace > | | > | | -----Original Message----- > | | From: Lee Fuller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > | | Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 12:10 PM > | | To: CF-Talk > | | Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF! > | | > | | Jesse, > | | > | | Yeah.. We understand that. We completely understand what you're > | | saying. But you missed my last post (or maybe I just > | haven't read your > | | response yet <grin>) that YOU may not want us to pay. But > | there are > | | others that WOULD. And that's what keeps us from calling > | up good-ol' > | | MM. > | | > | | > | | | -----Original Message----- > | | | From: Jesse Noller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > | | | Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 8:36 AM > | | | To: CF-Talk > | | | Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF! > | | | > | | | > | | | I think that something is being missed. If the bug is > | | | with CFMX, you do not pay. That simple, we have our reasons for > | | | asking for a credit card number, but it doesn't change > | the fact that > | | | if it a cfmx bug, you do not pay. > | | | > | | | Do not pay. > | | | > | | | I understand your gripe, trust me, as someone who has > | | | to deal with the varying operating systems and software > | packages I > | | | have to, I completely understand. > | | | > | | | However, reading and addressing issues on mailing lists > | | | is not my day-job. I do development and other assorted > | things. While > | | | having the time to reply to mailing list issues is nice, > | that's not > | | | how 99% of issues get reported and resolved. > | | | > | | | > | | | > | | | Jesse Noller > | | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] > | | | Macromedia Server Development > | | | > | | | > -----Original Message----- > | | | > From: Dave Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > | | | > Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 11:21 AM > | | | > To: CF-Talk > | | | > Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF! > | | | > > | | | > See Jesse, > | | | > > | | | > Many of us such as Lee and myself have been working with CF > | | | for a long > | | | > long time and we love the product, etc etc. > | | | > > | | | > When we run into problems, we take every step we can think > | | | of to try > | | | > and resolve the issue, not just for our own benefit, > | but for the > | | | > benefit of the product itself. When persons like ourselves > | | | (there are > | | | > thousands of us) contact Macromedia to resolve an issue > | | | it's usually > | | | > in good spirit and we usually want to work *with* Macromedia in > | | | > resolving the issues- y'know, kinda like being a beta > | | tester. We're > | | | > doing it for the product and the community as well as > | for our own > | | | > benefit. Now being asked for a cc in this kind of > | | situation is just > | | | > too hard to stomach. It feels like walking along the > | | | street, spotting > | | | > a dangerous obstruction, attempting to move it to a safe > | | place when > | | | > suddenly being accosted by a police officer asking us > | to pay money > | | | > to move such a dangerous object out of the way, or in this > | | | > particular argument, provide security in case *we* do something > | | | > wrong, > | | | when what we > | | | > are > | | | > doing is helping. > | | | > > | | | > Just my $0.2 > | | | > Dave > | | | > > | | | > > | | | > | | > | | > | > | > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm
