//My opinion is that fusebox makes 90% of application development in //coldfusion easier and more standardized. The other 10% you have to either //violate the "rules" or make a work around.
FUSEBOX is not a set of rules, this is what is so irritating about peoples ignorance to the methodology, its a free Open Source standard API to work from. You take it from there. FUSEBOX community nor their creators claim its the Holy Grail, how can it be for gods sake. As a developer and an individual, you are creative, intelligent, analytical, you need to make alterations, fixes, workarounds, is this not called initiative, " breaking rules " is so negative. and my 2 cents, or 2p in N.Ireland J. -----Original Message----- From: Fregas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 20 February 2003 20:38 To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: FBX3 AND CFMX Bryan, I think the issues here is trade-offs. To use fusebox, you must give up certain ways of coding and adopt others. This might make certain tasks "more difficult". The question is: are the sacrifices made to conform to fusebox worth accepting in order to avoid some problems and take advantage of the framework? This is where you'll get arguments. Also, fusebox isn't meant to be a straight jacket. There are times where you must simply violate the methodology to do what needs to be done. This isn't necessarily bad any more than violating OOP principals to make a database layer in an application is bad (because databases aren't OOP.) An example of this is when I was using Fusebox 2. Fusebox 2 had the rule: "THOU SHALT PUT ALL CFINCLUDES AND CFMODULES IN THE INDEX.CFM. THOU SHALT NOT PUT THEM IN ANY OTHER FILE." This was a rule that helped me enormously in the majority of applications and kept from having includes that included other includes and so on. Well, I needed to use recursion in one particular project. Since there were no UDFs or CFCs back than I had to have a fuseaction that CFINCLUDED a file that CFMODULED itself. This violated fusebox principals but under that circumstance I thought it was very appropriate to do so. My opinion is that fusebox makes 90% of application development in coldfusion easier and more standardized. The other 10% you have to either violate the "rules" or make a work around. You'll probably more often hear about people needing workarounds and needing help because the other 90% of their development went well and they don't need to talk about that. Just my 0.02. Fregas ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Stevenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 2:21 PM Subject: Re: FBX3 AND CFMX > Nope..ya missed my point....CFMX migration was just an example. I've seen > lost of issues that FBers have had to workaround just to work within the > methodology. To me personally (and ain't nobody gonna change my mind) that > is counter productive. > > I've always built custom apps (tailored to meet the clients needs/standards > etc.) and I've never had any problem with other coders taking over and > understanding the whole app or the portion they need to build and slot in. > > but now we're heading towards what's better ;-) > > I got a great unbiased response from Barney and I'm happy with that. > > Cheers > > Bryan Stevenson B.Comm. > VP & Director of E-Commerce Development > Electric Edge Systems Group Inc. > t. 250.920.8830 > e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------- > Macromedia Associate Partner > www.macromedia.com > --------------------------------------------------------- > Vancouver Island ColdFusion Users Group > Founder & Director > www.cfug-vancouverisland.com > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Michael Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 12:00 PM > Subject: RE: FBX3 AND CFMX > > > > Hi, > > > > If I understand your point correctly, I would argue that migrating any > > existing application, Fusebox or other, to CFMX could potentially > > require some code adjustments. For me, Fusebox has worked fine on CFMX > > with only a single modification--telling Fusebox which version of CF I'm > > using. Also, I think the benefit of standardized development practices > > is one of the features that attract developers to Fusebox. I like the > > fact that all of the developers in my department are coding in the same > > manner and that there is a large community that supports the > > methodology. If you haven't looked at it for a while, you might want to > > check out FuseQ, a Fusebox-hybrid (I think Techspedition calls it a > > "private implementation") that addresses some of the shortcomings > > (multiple fuseaction requests--per page, error handling, security, and > > etc.) of Fusebox 3. The cool thing about FuseQ, beyond the enhancements > > it delivers, is that it can be used as a replacement for all Fusebox 3 > > applications--even if you don't use the FuseQ features. > > > > I started using Fusebox during version 2 and dropped it as well--version > > 3 is much better and FuseQ adds some really useful features. > > > > http://www.techspedition.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=articles.showArticle&A > > rticleID=108 > > > > Best regards, > > MW > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Bryan Stevenson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > It still baffles me that people use FB simply because I always see > > various wrokarounds etc. because of using FB (like simply because of > > switching to CFMX this or that must be re-worked). I fully understand > > the "hand off to other coders and easy to update" ideal of FB, but any > > well written app has those features. So I'm left wondering....why use > > FB if it adds to your problems? > > > > Did most FB folks start CF using FB or adopt it along the way? > > > > Personally I started using a similar methodology before FB > > existed....saw limitations I didn't like and dropped it. > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 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 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
