Looking forward to the public beta!
Dick
On Aug 18, 2004, at 9:50 AM, Vince Bonfanti wrote:
> Hi Dick,
>
> 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]
