On Nov 29, 10:33 pm, "Peter J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote: > Josh Hayes-Sheen said the following on 11/29/2010 09:02 PM:> This is > something else that's burned me already, There are several > > places where Coldbox expects exception structs to contain backtraces, > > and on attempting to access them it just causes another exception to > > be thrown (And makes it harded to track down the actual problem) > > Yep, OpenBD does not provide a stack trace because the way it "compiles" > code (and I use that loosely here because it's more like an execution > stack) is different. >
ghrgrgh, that's going to be painful > If you do look, I do advise you to be careful and respect licenses. The > Mach-II code base is GPL v3 with a classpath exception. This is > incompatible with moving / copying code from GPL v3 into an Apache style > license. > I do pay attention to licensing before I would ever copy and paste anything, And I doubt the frameworks are similar enough to make directly lifting any non-trivial code possible anyways. > There is a reason why Team Mach-II doesn't look at code from > other CFML frameworks. Plus, it's just professional respect among > framework authors in my opinion. This applies to Railo Vs. OpenBD -- > they can share ideas but ripping off internal architecture / design is > less than honest in my book. > *sigh* and here I thought the point of open source was so that we could all share and improve actual code. Shame so many peoples ideas of "Free" and "Open" differ by such large degrees. (I'll say more about this in the discussion below) -- Open BlueDragon Public Mailing List http://www.openbluedragon.org/ http://twitter.com/OpenBlueDragon official manual: http://www.openbluedragon.org/manual/ Ready2Run CFML http://www.openbluedragon.org/openbdjam/ mailing list - http://groups.google.com/group/openbd?hl=en
