Regarding your first two questions, details of the CFMESSAGE tag will be
announced when we release the BD 6.2 public beta (this is a fancy way of
saying, "I don't know yet").
Regarding "...tradeoffs of a cfmessage tag vs an event gateway...", three
answers:
1. We started work on the CFMESSAGE tag before ever hearing of the event
gateway, so it's not as if we made a decision to do one instead of the
other.
2. We really don't know all that much about the event gateway, since
Macromedia have released little if any technical details publicly; so it's a
bit difficult for me to comment on just yet.
3. Implementing a CFMESSAGE tag doesn't preclude implementing an event
gateway (and vice-versa). If after seeing details of the event gateway we
think it's something useful that people will want, then we'll implement it
in BD; if not, then we won't. That's mainly going to depend on whether you
(CFML developers in general, and BlueDragon customers in particular) tell us
the event gateway is something you need or want. While the general
descriptions we've heard of the event gateway sound pretty cool, it's not
clear to me that it's something most CFML developers will be able to make
use of effectively (certainly, my personal opinion is there are other more
compelling features in Blackstone). Our attitude right now is neutral--we'll
wait and see after it's delivered and respond appropriately.
Vince
________________________________
From: Dick Applebaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2004 12:34 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Event Gateway on BlueDragon, etc. ( was:BLACKSTONE:
Software Development Times Article)
On Aug 18, 2004, at 8:05 AM, Vince Bonfanti wrote:
> Second, based on the information that's available publicly so
far,
> there's
> nothing to technically prevent us from implementing an event
gateway
> in
> BlueDragon, if we choose to do so. Indeed, we've already got a
working
> prototype of a CFMESSAGE tag that gives you access to JMS (on
Java)
> and
> Message Queuing (on .NET) that will likely be delivered in
BlueDragon
> 6.2
> later this year, well before the Blackstone release. (The
CFMESSAGE
> tag is
> something we were working on before we ever heard of the
Blackstone
> event
> gateway).
>
Vince
I am interested in the fact that you are providing access to JMS
with a
CF tag as opposed to an event gateway.
When I first investigated the subject, based on Sean Corfields posts
&
blog it occurred to me that a slick way to provide this access would
be
a "cfmessage" tag -- even used that name. Sean almost (but not
totally) convinced me that a gateway was a better approach.
Intuitively, I think that a cfmessage tage would be easier for a
developer to use/understand -- but if a JMS event gateway is
procvided
with Blackstone, that is probably a wash.
I am interested in hearing:
1) will the cfmessage tag implement all features of JMS senders
receivers (syncrhonous and asynchronous).
2) will cfmessage allow manipulation of messages without consuming
them
-- say, as an an admin function to change priorities, etc, or just
examine messages in the system (a great debugging aid, too)
3) your thoughts on the tradeoffs of a cfmessage tag vs an event
gateway
TIA
Dick
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
