Re: Event Gateway on BlueDragon, etc. ( was:BLACKSTONE: Software Development Times Article)
On Aug 20, 2004, at 9:33 AM, Sean Corfield wrote: > On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 10:52:08 -0700, Dick Applebaum > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Wouldn't it be practical to use a cfmessage tag to set up a > listener... > > something like: > > > > > > mode=SetListner > > MessageType=queue or topic > > MessageName= QueueName or TopicName > > Component=path to CFC > > Method=Function to invoke > > /> > > In other words, a tag that effectively created an event gateway on the > fly much as cfschedule sets up scheduled tasks on the fly? > Precisely! Dick [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
Re: Event Gateway on BlueDragon, etc. ( was:BLACKSTONE: Software Development Times Article)
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 10:52:08 -0700, Dick Applebaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Wouldn't it be practical to use a cfmessage tag to set up a listener... > something like: > > > mode=SetListner > MessageType=queue or topic > MessageName= QueueName or TopicName > Component=path to CFC > Method=Function to invoke > /> In other words, a tag that effectively created an event gateway on the fly much as cfschedule sets up scheduled tasks on the fly? -- Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
Re: Event Gateway on BlueDragon, etc. ( was:BLACKSTONE: Software Development Times Article)
I wasn't clear: I didn't mean to replace the event gateway with a cfmessage tag. Rather, use a cf tag construct to setup a listener- processor relationship that the event gateway uses. This would not change the way the event gateway interface JMS. It just allow the user define the interface of JMS to his app without requiring knowledge of Java, Dick On Aug 18, 2004, at 10:59 AM, Matt Liotta wrote: > That would mean the app server would have to poll the message queue > and then > invoke a CFC as needed, which could certainly work. However, then you > would > still need some other application to respond to 3rd party "events" > and put > them on the queue. At that point, if seems easier just to have a > "gateway" > that invokes a CFC directly. If you need it asynchronous, then that > CFC > could then put some message on the queue. > > -Matt > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On Behalf Of Dick Applebaum > > Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2004 1:52 PM > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: Re: Event Gateway on BlueDragon, etc. ( was:BLACKSTONE: > Software > > Development Times Article) > > > > I am new to JMS, so be gentle :) > > > > Wouldn't it be practical to use a cfmessage tag to set up a > listener... > > something like: > > > > > > mode=SetListner > > MessageType=queue or topic > > MessageName= QueueName or TopicName > > Component=path to CFC > > Method=Function to invoke > > /> > > > > Couldn't this be used to implement something like: > > > > http://www.devx.com/Java/Article/20903/0/page/3 > > > > See the link to listing 1 (asynchronous reader) at the bottom of the > > page. > > > > Where: > > > > 1) the cfmessage tag sets up the listener and denotes a cfc. to be > > invoked when the listener fires > > > > 2) the CFC method receives the message in the argument named its > input > > parameter & processes the message as desired. > > > > > > Certainly there are a lot more details, but this would be the > overall > > approach > > > > Practical? > > > > Dick > > > > On Aug 18, 2004, at 10:11 AM, Matt Liotta wrote: > > > > > > 3) your thoughts on the tradeoffs of a cfmessage tag vs an event > > > gateway > > > > > > > One major tradeoff is the ability for CFML to be invoked based > on a > > > message. > > > With a cfmessage tag you still need the CFM or CFC making use of > it to > > > execute. An event gateway or something of similar design would > invoke > > > CFML > > > based on some 3rd party input. > > > > > > -Matt > > > > > > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
RE: Event Gateway on BlueDragon, etc. ( was:BLACKSTONE: Software Development Times Article)
That would mean the app server would have to poll the message queue and then invoke a CFC as needed, which could certainly work. However, then you would still need some other application to respond to 3rd party "events" and put them on the queue. At that point, if seems easier just to have a "gateway" that invokes a CFC directly. If you need it asynchronous, then that CFC could then put some message on the queue. -Matt > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of Dick Applebaum > Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2004 1:52 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Event Gateway on BlueDragon, etc. ( was:BLACKSTONE: Software > Development Times Article) > > I am new to JMS, so be gentle :) > > Wouldn't it be practical to use a cfmessage tag to set up a listener... > something like: > > > mode=SetListner > MessageType=queue or topic > MessageName= QueueName or TopicName > Component=path to CFC > Method=Function to invoke > /> > > Couldn't this be used to implement something like: > > http://www.devx.com/Java/Article/20903/0/page/3 > > See the link to listing 1 (asynchronous reader) at the bottom of the > page. > > Where: > > 1) the cfmessage tag sets up the listener and denotes a cfc. to be > invoked when the listener fires > > 2) the CFC method receives the message in the argument named its input > parameter & processes the message as desired. > > > Certainly there are a lot more details, but this would be the overall > approach > > Practical? > > Dick > > On Aug 18, 2004, at 10:11 AM, Matt Liotta wrote: > > > > 3) your thoughts on the tradeoffs of a cfmessage tag vs an event > > gateway > > > > > One major tradeoff is the ability for CFML to be invoked based on a > > message. > > With a cfmessage tag you still need the CFM or CFC making use of it to > > execute. An event gateway or something of similar design would invoke > > CFML > > based on some 3rd party input. > > > > -Matt > > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
Re: Event Gateway on BlueDragon, etc. ( was:BLACKSTONE: Software Development Times Article)
I am new to JMS, so be gentle :) Wouldn't it be practical to use a cfmessage tag to set up a listener... something like: mode=SetListner MessageType=queue or topic MessageName= QueueName or TopicName Component=path to CFC Method=Function to invoke /> Couldn't this be used to implement something like: http://www.devx.com/Java/Article/20903/0/page/3 See the link to listing 1 (asynchronous reader) at the bottom of the page. Where: 1) the cfmessage tag sets up the listener and denotes a cfc. to be invoked when the listener fires 2) the CFC method receives the message in the argument named its input parameter & processes the message as desired. Certainly there are a lot more details, but this would be the overall approach Practical? Dick On Aug 18, 2004, at 10:11 AM, Matt Liotta wrote: > > 3) your thoughts on the tradeoffs of a cfmessage tag vs an event > gateway > > > One major tradeoff is the ability for CFML to be invoked based on a > message. > With a cfmessage tag you still need the CFM or CFC making use of it to > execute. An event gateway or something of similar design would invoke > CFML > based on some 3rd party input. > > -Matt > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
Re: Event Gateway on BlueDragon, etc. ( was:BLACKSTONE: Software Development Times Article)
Good answers! 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]
RE: Event Gateway on BlueDragon, etc. ( was:BLACKSTONE: Software Development Times Article)
> 3) your thoughts on the tradeoffs of a cfmessage tag vs an event gateway > One major tradeoff is the ability for CFML to be invoked based on a message. With a cfmessage tag you still need the CFM or CFC making use of it to execute. An event gateway or something of similar design would invoke CFML based on some 3rd party input. -Matt [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
RE: Event Gateway on BlueDragon, etc. ( was:BLACKSTONE: Software Development Times Article)
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]
Re: Event Gateway on BlueDragon, etc. ( was:BLACKSTONE: Software Development Times Article)
On Aug 18, 2004, at 11:05 AM, Vince Bonfanti wrote: > Now that we also have the BlueDragon "infrastructure" in place (on > both Java > and .NET), adding new features can be done fairly rapidly. Let the good times roll! -- Damien McKenna - Web Developer - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Limu Company - http://www.thelimucompany.com/ - 407-804-1014 "Nothing endures but change." - Heraclitus [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
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]
RE: Event Gateway on BlueDragon, etc. ( was:BLACKSTONE: Software Development Times Article)
Hi Adrian, Glad you asked! Here's a list of BlueDragon-certified hosting providers: http://www.newatlanta.com/products/bluedragon/partners/hosting.cfm Vince Bonfanti New Atlanta Communications, LLC http://www.newatlanta.com From: Adrian Lynch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2004 11:43 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Event Gateway on BlueDragon, etc. ( was:BLACKSTONE: Software Development Times Article) Hey Vince, I don't suppose you have a list or a link to a bunch of BD hosting companies? I would have emailed you personally but I figured it would be cool for everyone else to see your answer! :OD Ade "never spoken to Vince before in my life" Lynch -Original Message- From: Alexander Sherwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 August 2004 16:15 To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Event Gateway on BlueDragon, etc. ( was:BLACKSTONE: Software Development Times Article) At 11:05 AM 8/18/2004, you wrote: This is good news, Vince. Thank's for the update and keeping the greater CF community in mind. Keep up the good work. -- Alex Sherwood >Now that we also have the BlueDragon "infrastructure" in place (on both Java >and .NET), adding new features can be done fairly rapidly. > >Regards, > >Vince Bonfanti >New Atlanta Communications, LLC >http://www.newatlanta.com > >P.S. Thanks for your feedback on the installer issues you had with the >BlueDragon.NET Technology Preview release. Based on your comments, we've >fixed the issues with overwriting the ".cfm" extension mappings in IIS; >these fixes will be in the BD.NET public beta to be released in a few weeks. > >P.P.S. I believe it was Picasso who said, "All artists borrow, great artists >steal." [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
RE: Event Gateway on BlueDragon, etc. ( was:BLACKSTONE: Software Development Times Article)
Hey Vince, I don't suppose you have a list or a link to a bunch of BD hosting companies? I would have emailed you personally but I figured it would be cool for everyone else to see your answer! :OD Ade "never spoken to Vince before in my life" Lynch -Original Message- From: Alexander Sherwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 August 2004 16:15 To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Event Gateway on BlueDragon, etc. ( was:BLACKSTONE: Software Development Times Article) At 11:05 AM 8/18/2004, you wrote: This is good news, Vince. Thank's for the update and keeping the greater CF community in mind. Keep up the good work. -- Alex Sherwood >Now that we also have the BlueDragon "infrastructure" in place (on both Java >and .NET), adding new features can be done fairly rapidly. > >Regards, > >Vince Bonfanti >New Atlanta Communications, LLC >http://www.newatlanta.com > >P.S. Thanks for your feedback on the installer issues you had with the >BlueDragon.NET Technology Preview release. Based on your comments, we've >fixed the issues with overwriting the ".cfm" extension mappings in IIS; >these fixes will be in the BD.NET public beta to be released in a few weeks. > >P.P.S. I believe it was Picasso who said, "All artists borrow, great artists >steal." [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
RE: Event Gateway on BlueDragon, etc. ( was:BLACKSTONE: Software Development Times Article)
At 11:05 AM 8/18/2004, you wrote: This is good news, Vince. Thank's for the update and keeping the greater CF community in mind. Keep up the good work. -- Alex Sherwood >Now that we also have the BlueDragon "infrastructure" in place (on both Java >and .NET), adding new features can be done fairly rapidly. > >Regards, > >Vince Bonfanti >New Atlanta Communications, LLC >http://www.newatlanta.com > >P.S. Thanks for your feedback on the installer issues you had with the >BlueDragon.NET Technology Preview release. Based on your comments, we've >fixed the issues with overwriting the ".cfm" extension mappings in IIS; >these fixes will be in the BD.NET public beta to be released in a few weeks. > >P.P.S. I believe it was Picasso who said, "All artists borrow, great artists >steal." [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
RE: Event Gateway on BlueDragon, etc. ( was:BLACKSTONE: Software Development Times Article)
Hi Tony, First, Matt Liotta does not represent nor speak for New Atlanta. If you have a problem with New Atlanta or BlueDragon, you should contact me; if you have a problem with Matt you should take it up with him and leave New Atlanta and BlueDragon out of it. 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). Regarding the other new Blackstone features, we already have a working prototype of the CFDOCUMENT tag--we're just waiting for the final documentation to be published by Macromedia--and have a strategy in place to support the new reporting features. From what we've seen so far, implementing most of the Blackstone features in BlueDragon will be fairly trivial (nothing at all on the scale of implementing CFCs or Web Services, for example). Now that we also have the BlueDragon "infrastructure" in place (on both Java and .NET), adding new features can be done fairly rapidly. Regards, Vince Bonfanti New Atlanta Communications, LLC http://www.newatlanta.com P.S. Thanks for your feedback on the installer issues you had with the BlueDragon.NET Technology Preview release. Based on your comments, we've fixed the issues with overwriting the ".cfm" extension mappings in IIS; these fixes will be in the BD.NET public beta to be released in a few weeks. P.P.S. I believe it was Picasso who said, "All artists borrow, great artists steal." From: Tony Weeg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2004 8:46 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: BLACKSTONE: Software Development Times Article is the underlying factor here some problem with how BD wont be able to piggyback the event gateway or use it or steal it? must be something like this, or else i dont think matt's panties would be in a bunch like this...they only tend to get into this sorta snag when something like this is happening... On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 08:24:06 -0400, Matt Liotta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Blackstone will ship with a number of out-of-the-box gateways that > > connect to a number of protocols - meaning ColdFusion developers don't > > need to write them. That in itself is a win. > > > Agreed, but Macromedia could have supplied protocol handlers without > building an event gateway. Instead, they went and built a framework that > constrains what an event gateway is and can do. That could be a really good > thing or it could be a really bad thing. Time will tell, but so far > frameworks have always been done better in the community. > > > Blackstone also provides an easy-to-use basic framework for such > > gateways to run inside, wired into the CF Admin. Ease of management is > > another win. > > > What is managed exactly? If it is anything like the web service "management" > you find now then no thanks. > > -Matt > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
