Good points there.
Thats all for me tonight. need sleep.
BORKMAN Lee wrote:
> Of course,
>
> But criticism is part of the useful info. On CF-Talk I can expect a fair
> bit of criticism by people who have no great interest or experience with
> FuseBox. This list is where I go for well-founded thoughts (positive and
> negative) on FuseBox, based on actual experience.
>
> I am certainly committed to FuseBox, but part of that committment means
> identifying weaknesses and helping to improve them.
>
> So at a highly specific level, code code code is fine, but if you want to
> make things better, you sometimes have to talk a little more abstract-ly
> (good word).
>
> best of luck,
> LBB
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: webmaster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> I look at this forum as a place to get great useful information and support
> from other fuseboxers. ...
>
> IMPORTANT NOTICE:
> This e-mail and any attachment to it is intended only to be read or used by
> the named addressee. It is confidential and may contain legally privileged
> information. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any
> mistaken transmission to you. If you receive this e-mail in error, please
> immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not
> disclose, copy or use any part of this e-mail if you are not the intended
> recipient. The RTA is not responsible for any unauthorised alterations to
> this e-mail or attachment to it.
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
