CF8 Tags vs. OpenBD

[Chopperguy]

Is there any thought in the new version of Wheels that we implement
some of the new/improved CF8 tags? I know if this is done, it'll kill
some of the OpenBD compatibility.

I'm thinking specifically, but not limited to:

Flash Forms.
Text Fields: type="datefield" type="autosuggest"
Text areas: richtext
Selects: Related select lists

cfdiv
cflayout
cfpod
cfwindow
cfdbinfo
cffeed

Just to name a few

[Per Djurner]

I'm using cfdbinfo in some code I have yet to commit actually, very handy :)

Generally speaking though I think it would be wise to wait and see what the CFML advisory committee comes up with.
It would be ideal to base Wheels on tags that will make it into the core CFML language (as decided by the committee) so that Wheels can run on all major engines (Adobe, BlueDragon, Railo).

More info here:
http://www.forta.com/blog/index.cfm/2008/6/19/Thoughts-On-The-CFML-Language-Advisory-Committee

/ Per

[tpet...@gmail.com]

not trying to start a war or anything just stating my opinion, i
expect change.

really i think that the main engine to focus on should be railo once
it is released. openbd has too much drama in its community and i
suspect that the project will fade into the background like smith did.
coupled with the fact that openbd doesn't have a backend to it (you
have to edit the xml file directly), cfdocument isn't supported and
it's on par with cf7 feature, makes it less desirable.

railo when released will be a fully featured product, which means it
will have a backend to it and all the features it currently doesn't
now. railo 3.0 is getting on par with cf8 although the ajax tags don't
look like they will make it in, you can check out more on railo 3
here:
http://www.railo-technologies.com/en/index.cfm?treeID=355

as for the ajax tags themselves, i really never like the fact that
adobe created them. i personally think they are very flaky, and the
ext library is very heavy. personally i would rather we write our own
stuff and use jquery to do it.

like i said at the beginning, this is my opinion.

[Chopperguy]

Opinion and inexperience to follow...

No war from me. I have had ZERO interaction with railo so I cannot
comment on it. I'd say OpenBD is more on par with MX, but that usually
starts an argument also, so I won't go there.

Guess I'll quickly finish up my Wheels pre-evaluation and start to
dive into Railo. I have an application that I have been developing in
CF8 for about 6 months now, and I'm looking for a framework to get it
on. Cannot stand what is out there because they are all so limiting/
resource intensive.

That is why I'm so interested in Wheels!

Personally, I hate that CF8 is using the YUI and FCKEditor, but they
definately save time! With that said, with the high level of CF
Community AJAX stuff out there, and something like TinyMCE, would have
made it MUCH better!

[Chris Peters]

This is a fine line to walk on, and we'll need to really think these things through as we come across them.

 

I'm leaning toward Tony's opinion as we have an opportunity to implement custom AJAXy features that integrate better with the framework than the core CFML tags would on their own. Of course, the core CFML tags will be available ala carte as developers needed them, and they can make their choice based on what CFML engine they're using.

 

There may be times though where we may have an Adobe-only feature like <cfdocument> with default Wheels layouts. And we could just mark in the Docs that you need Adobe CF to use the feature.

 

In terms of ala carte choices, consider this example...

I think Wheels' sendMail() function is awesome because you can use a default layout. But sometimes I like <cfmail> better because you can do multi-part MIME messages. Sometimes there is a trade-off. But as a developer, I have the choice to exit the Wheels framework depending on what I need. (Which reminds me, I need to add a feature request for 0.8 that allows for multi-part MIME in sendMail().)

[Peter Amiri]

Sense we are throwing out opinions I thought I chime in. On the one hand I think it would be great if Wheels could be engine agnostic and run on multiple engines. In fact I for one would support changing the name of the project from CF Wheels to simply Wheels. That being said, in the short term we have had to use some CF8 only features to get the project out the door with the functionality we currently have. But in the longer term I think I agree with Chris that we may have engine specific features in the framework as long as the core of the framework worked on multiple engines.

Having said that, I hold the personal opinion that one of the reasons Rails took off was that it included a web server in the download. So I would like to see at a future date a Wheels download that installed a pre-configured CFML engine. Whether that engine is OpenBD or Rails or Smith for that matter I don't really care but I think it would help with the adoption of the project. This would make it easier to package Wheels with Linux distros and perhaps OS X.

I am looking forward to the Ralio 3.0 is release to see what actually gets into the release and how it compares to CF8, BlueDragon.NET, and OpenBD as far as speed goes. One thing is for sure, we have more choice in the CFML world.

-Peter

PS. I didn't intend to start and wars with these comments. I apologize in advance if I offended anyone with my comments.

[Chopperguy]

That's what I like about opinions, every has one, and you can always
learn a lot from each of them!

Thanks for the discussion! I can remember if I had started a post like
this in the PHP world, I would have gotten "You stupid so and so, read
the documentation" or "Great, another so called programmer that just
doesn't get it." The CF world has always been the most receptive.

Some times, it's great being a programmer that also knows a few tag
languages and can work across the spectrum. Just to let you know, I
have been programming for over 13 years now, working with CF for over
8 of them, and am not what I would consider a great programmer, but I
do know a lot of languages, and I have to say that so far, I like what
Wheels has to offer. I see it's potential, and as long as it doesn't
turn into a behemoth, it should take off.

Thanks to everyone for making this happen!

> > On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 4:25 PM, tpetru...@gmail.com <tpetru...@gmail.com