> -Original Message-
> From: Loathe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 7:24 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Arrgghhhh! Adobe should loosen up the developer edition a
> bit.
>
> Hell, cfexpress (was that it?) was a free version that w
What about something like netmeeting? Allow the user's to see your
screen and give them control
Probably not the best answer but we do they when showing the biz a
local copy of the site before pushing it to dev to allow the users to
play around with it
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 12:50 PM, Zaphod B
Internal databases with gigs of data
On Apr 2, 2008, at 12:44 PM, Robert Munn wrote:
> What about using a shared hosting environment solely for the purpose
> of
> these kinds of demos? $25/mo or so to get you out of that hassle.
"So I mixed up the batter and she licked the beater!"
What about using a shared hosting environment solely for the purpose of
these kinds of demos? $25/mo or so to get you out of that hassle.
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 12:17 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "A License exception has been thrown"
>
> One more reason it can be easier to
d to learn more about.
God I miss Allaire.
Jim Davis wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Zaphod Beeblebrox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 10:21 PM
>> To: CF-Community
>> Subject: Re: Arrgghhhh! Adobe should loosen up the deve
> -Original Message-
> From: Zaphod Beeblebrox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 10:21 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Arrgghhhh! Adobe should loosen up the developer edition a
> bit.
>
> I'm pretty certain that you can set up ve
I'm pretty certain that you can set up very, very similar environments with
asp and asp.net, but that's not my point. My point was why limit access to
the developer edition to two ip address. Wouldn't 10 or even 20 be
sufficient. Is Adobe afraid that someone might run a cf site on the
developer
No, I was pointing out that you were complaining that an enterprise
application server that costs lots of money doesn't follow the same business
rules as open source software, and that you seem surprised by that fact.
Is there any for-pay software on earth that follows the same business rules
as a
as far as I know, it's not open sourced yet? Am I missing something?
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 8:53 PM, Jerry Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So you are saying that cf isn't open source?
>
> Uh, duh?
>
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 9:50 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I'v
So you are saying that cf isn't open source?
Uh, duh?
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 9:50 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've been down that road before. I had a server that ran the latest
> version
> of BD that was available to run free as a server. It was a pain finding
> out
>
I've been down that road before. I had a server that ran the latest version
of BD that was available to run free as a server. It was a pain finding out
that things didn't necessarily run the same way on BD as it did on CF. Plus
were already invested in CF licenses.
As for a bogus reason...well,
Isn't that more than a bit of a bogus reason. Besides if you're so worried
about it, you could install BlueDragon JX or Railo, they have more liberal
rules for their developers versions. Also there's the BlueDragon Open source
version for J2EE that's going to be out very shortly.
>"A License e
"A License exception has been thrown"
One more reason it can be easier to develop in Rails vs CFI tried
to get 3 people to comment on some mods I was doing to the web site.
First two got inthird got the above message.
I know that you don't want people using dev versions for hosting,
13 matches
Mail list logo
