I think it depends on the application. In larger older applications with decades of bad practice applied to them, I have personally found it can be very challenging to move to either OpenBD or Railo. My company has an old legacy application that we experimented moving as a POC. I tried for about 2 solid days to migrate it, finding roadblock after roadblock in the process that required code chances, and ultimately had to put it all on the back burner to contend with more pressing issues. It should be noted that almost all the problems were due to what I would consider bad approaches in the first place, but they were issues that had to be resolved nonetheless.
I am not saying it can't be a replacement, nor do I think that it wouldn't be worth the effort in many cases, but I think we should be careful with the message that people can just drop another engine in and be happy. I think that the experience that I had would probably turn a lot of "on the fence" folks off. @dshuck On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 4:07 PM, Matthew Woodward <[email protected]>wrote: > On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Jason King <[email protected]>wrote: > >> I'm not sure! >> >> I don't have much experience with migrating apps and I'm not up to >> date on the differences, so I was just suggesting that the minor >> differences between the two (in regards to missing features) be looked >> at more closely. >> > > Honestly the migration path is 99.9% painless. Missing features--not sure > there are any that many people actually use. Big ones would be ORM and > Flash Remoting (ahem ;-)) but beyond that ... > > I guess to me if that ever actually happens I think we're already in a > good position to run a huge percentage of the CFML code out there. And if > that ever actually happens we'd of course write up some thorough migration > documentation for the few changes people might need to make. > -- > Matthew Woodward > [email protected] > http://blog.mattwoodward.com > identi.ca / Twitter: @mpwoodward > > Please do not send me proprietary file formats such as Word, PowerPoint, > etc. as attachments. > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html > > -- > official tag/function reference: http://openbd.org/manual/ > mailing list - http://groups.google.com/group/openbd?hl=en > -- official tag/function reference: http://openbd.org/manual/ mailing list - http://groups.google.com/group/openbd?hl=en
