On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 2:59 AM, Alan Williamson wrote: >> In my example, we'll probably end up with a better grammar for IDE >> purposes anyway (diversity is good, yet not *always* good), but it was >> an opportunity not only to let me continue to procrastinate "really" >> learning ANTLR, but to get OpenBD kinda involved with the bestest open >> source CFML IDE-- with no new investment cost on the OpenBD side. > > "bestest open source source CFML IDE" ... you mean the only one! ;) >
=)p There's actually a fair amount of /editors/ for CFML out there. "IDE" is kinda a loaded term. We're compiling a list of everything with CFML support on the CFEclipse site, so we can provide a, *gasp* /useful/ matrix for CMFL devs (vs. pointy-headed bosses). ;) > >> With the GPL (even the v3, I think, tho I'm far from an expert), CFE >> can't say, use OpenBD as an embedded engine for nifty CFML-based >> stuff. > >> For all intents and purposes, OBD is basically in the same boat as >> ACF, as far as CFE goes. > > > Approach us ... let us know what you want to use and we can look to grant a > specific license for your project. Railo are using OpenBD code in their > build and we have adjusted individual component licenses accordingly. > Hrm. The cfscript ANTLR grammar I've been futzing with is now handling 98% of what we need it to... but: 1) I had gotten as far as integrating the OpenBD grammar w/CFE (technically w/cfml.parsing, a separate project for the parser that CFE is leveraging) before giving up due to the license issue, and I haven't gotten to that part with the new grammar yet. 2) I'd really like to promote OpenBD. Mark is deeply involved with Railo, obviously, and I don't want us to become a Railo IDE, vs. a CFML IDE (not that he wants that either). I see the open source engines and the open source IDEs (at least CFE) as having a strong mutual whatsit. =) > Communication ... its the key. Let us know what you want, how it could > benefit the greater community and we can talk. We are open to many > avenues. > If you guys are open to working something out, I can shelve the grammar I've been working on, and go back what I had based on the OpenBD grammar. Since the cfml.parsing project is separate from CFE, we could license it under the LGPL, which would allow us to have more of a GPL-ish nature for the parser while not making it's use in things such as CFE unacceptable. I'm still more of a MIT/BSD kind of guy, but maybe that would be a "meet in the middle" type of deal? I think being able to say "Thanks to OpenBD, you have a better CFE experience" would be good mojo for CFE+OpenBD-- evidence that, I don't know, "we're all in this together", if you will. I love how the engines are working together towards open standards, and I ultimately want to have that same kind of relationship between the engines and CFE. :Den -- We are twice armed if we fight with faith. Plato -- 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
