Anyone interested in Railo hosting?

Hello. In a month or two I'll be getting a dedicated server, and I've had a thought: maybe I should go for the next server spec up, get Railo Enterprise, and offer Railo hosting. (for those unaware of what Railo is, it's a really excellent CFML engine, better than all other CFML engines in nearly every way) Obviously, it would only be useful doing this if there was sufficient demand. So, is there anyone here that would potentially or definitely be interested in such a service? What level of hosting would you need and are there any specific features that you'd want? The server would be in a UK-based data centre, and be running on Linux. As well as Railo it would have PHP5 and MySQL5 - possibly other stuff depending on demand, feasability, etc. If you are potentially interested, or know anyone that might be, please let me know (either here or on cf~bpsite.co.uk) so I can decide how viable it is, and if there is sufficient interest I will work out in more detail what would be on offer and at what cost. Thanks, Peter

At the risk of sounding like a complete *@^&!, why would >anyone< want to go backwards and use Railo?  I mean, it's still not even compatible with CF MX.  I'm sure I speak for an extremely high percentage of CFers out there when I say, "Thank God we're not in the pre-MX days anymore!"  (For those who never were in the pre-MX days, trust me, you're happy about it.) ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

I agree, unless your giving it away, I wouldn't pay for hosting on anything other than the official product, I only stand to loose stuff and gain nothing. Regards Dale Fraser http://dale.fraser.id.au/blog At the risk of sounding like a complete *@^&!, why would >anyone< want to go backwards and use Railo?  I mean, it's still not even compatible with CF MX.  I'm sure I speak for an extremely high percentage of CFers out there when I say, "Thank God we're not in the pre-MX days anymore!"  (For those who never were in the pre-MX days, trust me, you're happy about it.) ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

No comment... Doug B. > I agree, unless your giving it away, I wouldn't pay for hosting on anything ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- go ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- engine, ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

> I agree, unless your giving it away, I wouldn't pay for hosting on > anything > other than the official product, I only stand to loose stuff and gain > nothing. I recommend Bluedragon hosting for some of my clients who get VPS accounts at VivioTech, but only because BlueDragon 6.2 is almost completely compatible with CFMX 6.1 - and most of the stuff I write for the open source world, I try to make compatible with Bluedragon - and it's not that difficult. As for Railo... I've never worked with it, but I know that Gert has sent me changes for CFFM because CFFM "out of the box" doesn't work with Railo. Rick -- > I'm not certified, but I have been told that I'm certifiable... > Visit http://www.opensourcecf.com today!

Yikes, wasn't expecting this big a response! (If only it was full of people saying "YES!") > Matt Quackenbush wrote: > At the risk of sounding like a complete *@^&!, why would >anyone< want to go > backwards and use Railo?  I mean, it's still not even compatible with CF > MX.  I'm sure I speak for an extremely high percentage of CFers out there > when I say, "Thank God we're not in the pre-MX days anymore!"  (For those > who never were in the pre-MX days, trust me, you're happy about it.) There are plenty of reasons to use Railo, but before I get into that, can you give an example of an important CFMX feature that Railo lacks? It doesn't support cfapplet, but I never use cfapplet and can't see me ever wanting to. Ditto cfcache, cfchart, cfgrid, cfreport, cftree. If you're someone that requires those tags then maybe Railo isn't for you, but it certainly isn't a pre-MX compiler! Now, getting back to why would anyone want to move forwards onto Railo, I've created an entry on my weblog to cover five features I like that Railo has over CFMX. - cfdump/eval - cffile/info - cfloop/file - Array/Struct/Query creation - Resources You can read the full thing here: http://blog.bpsite.net/index.php/Why%20Railo.html?itemid=24 If these plus the things Gert went into are not enough to convince you that Railo is not simply a viable option, but also a serious contender, then I'm happy to go on and on about all the great things which Railo has to offer - just say the word. ;) > Dale Fraser wrote: > All those items you list are only relevant to hosting providers, Just wanted to highlight this point, because Railo is good for hosting. With CF shared hosting, users don't have Administrator access, and often have to ask their hosts for datasources. Railo Enterprise comes with an overall server Admin, AND a seperate Admin for each webroot. If this wasn't the case, I wouldn't be asking here if people wanted Railo CFML hosting - I'd be going to my photography club and asking if anyone wanted photo hosting instead. > Doug Brown wrote: > Just a side note, or question...What reasons do people think that asp/php has > the stronghold on web development ASP - because it's Microsoft. PHP - because it's free, and an improvement over CGI/Perl. > and what can be done to make CF just as popular? > > A. Better performing code > B. Cheaper development > C. Cheaper hosting > D. Other (Explain) A: Yup. (Railo!) B: Yup. (Railo!) C: Yup. (Railo! ...well, if I get enough interest to go ahead :P ) D: Okay, there are a few repeated things that I encounter when trying to promote CF in the past: 1) Many people don't believe it's a proper language. They think it's a lightweight markup language, not a fully-featured powerful scripting language. 2) The tags put people off. For some reason people seem to like ambiguous C-style curly brackets, and the starting-with-cf bit isn't popular. 3) Because of the tags, it's often perceived that CFML must be mixed in with HTML. 4) The price - many (most?) people in the CF world aren't even aware of Railo/BlueDragon/Smith, so trying to point out to non-CFers that there are low price and free solutions often doesn't get anywhere. To make it popular, these need to be countered, along with re-affirming the main benefits. Someone with Flash skills should make a viral promotional meme thingy that does this, and then CF can take over the world! *insert hysterical laughter* :)

> You can read the full thing here: http://blog.bpsite.net/index. > php/Why%20Railo.html?itemid=24 Ooops, URL got chopped. Should be everything inside the brackets... [ http://blog.bpsite.net/index.php/Why%20Railo.html?itemid=24 ]

Will you be waiting for version 1.1? I believe that will be very close to Adobe CF 7 ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

>Will you be waiting for version 1.1? > >I believe that will be very close to Adobe CF 7 I'll be going with the latest stable release. Whether that starts of being 1.1 depends on how soon that is released and how long it takes to get myself sorted. If I'm ready before 1.1 then I'll start with 1.0 and upgrade when it becomes available.

Hi all together, I read all the posts from you guys saying that there should be no reason to host Railo since it is only compatible to version MX 6.1. And you know you are absolutely right, if you do not care for: - security - performance - price Why do people still start new hosting on Bluedragon? Easy. Because it is well known and a lot of people use it. I am sure that Railo will make it's way too. Since with the architecture, performance, features and everything else even better in Railo 1.1 the gap to MX 7.0x is not so large anymore. In fact the gap would have to be closed in some cases by the other vendors. But you are definitely right. Railo needs to gain the trust of the users and programmers. I guess we are on the way to do this. At the moment we have a lot of happy customers :-) But it takes time. Allaire hasn't won the market in one day. Greetings / Grüsse Gert Franz Customer Care Railo Technologies GmbH gert.franz@railo.ch www.railo.ch Join our Mailing List / Treten Sie unserer Mailingliste bei: deutsch: http://de.groups.yahoo.com/group/railo/ english: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/railo_talk/ Peter Boughton schrieb: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

1. Security Says Who? Once you have a decent sized user base with people testing for security weaknesses, I really don't see how you can claim this. Just because you and your limited user base hasn't found security holes doesn't mean they don't exist. I also bet that almost every CFer in here will say that Coldfusion is very secure, I've never had any issues. 2. Performance What's that saying on stats, CF8 is supposed to be much faster again so lets do a comparison in a few months. 3. Pricing Seriously, I looked at the pricing, it aint all that great, just like BD's if it was significantly less expensive you might have a case, but it's marginally less expensive with less features. Regards Dale Fraser Hi all together, I read all the posts from you guys saying that there should be no reason to host Railo since it is only compatible to version MX 6.1. And you know you are absolutely right, if you do not care for: - security - performance - price Why do people still start new hosting on Bluedragon? Easy. Because it is well known and a lot of people use it. I am sure that Railo will make it's way too. Since with the architecture, performance, features and everything else even better in Railo 1.1 the gap to MX 7.0x is not so large anymore. In fact the gap would have to be closed in some cases by the other vendors. But you are definitely right. Railo needs to gain the trust of the users and programmers. I guess we are on the way to do this. At the moment we have a lot of happy customers :-) But it takes time. Allaire hasn't won the market in one day. Greetings / Grüsse Gert Franz Customer Care Railo Technologies GmbH gert.franz@railo.ch www.railo.ch Join our Mailing List / Treten Sie unserer Mailingliste bei: deutsch: http://de.groups.yahoo.com/group/railo/ english: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/railo_talk/ Peter Boughton schrieb: > Hello. > > In a month or two I'll be getting a dedicated server, and I've had a > thought: maybe I should go for the next server spec up, get Railo > Enterprise, and offer Railo hosting. > > (for those unaware of what Railo is, it's a really excellent CFML engine, better than all other CFML engines in nearly every way) ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Hi Dale, here my comments to your concerns: 1. security Railo does not claim to be absolutely secure in terms of weaknesses or security holes. Nor do we claim to be more secure than other engines in this terms. But just give me your thoughts about these matters: How do you prevent users from different webs in one instance of: - accessing other datasources (without having different db-users etc) - accessing all mappings - accessing all customtags - accessing all cfx-tags - allowing some webs to access the file system and others not - allowing some users to use java objects and others not this is the type of security i addressed. 2. performance I agree on that. I just compared Railo to the existing engines. And we will look for ways of improving performance if MX8 is faster than Railo 1.1 3. pricing I do not know what pricing you relate. Since the enterprise version is much cheaper than the ones of BD and MX. For those who just need the professional version it is the same. And there in addition is the free community version. And yes, we can argue about the features. In fact i see it the other way round. But in addition I have to say that, since I am from Railo :-) Gert Dale Fraser wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Hey gert, All those items you list are only relevant to hosting providers, most users don't do this, a very small percentage. I use it in a corporate environment on our production servers for our use, so not only do I have any experience with those items, I have no interest. I was however impressed with the compatibility list, seems very complete for version 1.1. The way I read it you support cfc's cfdocument and almost everything other that the listed exception, a very good start. One battle you will have is convincing people to spend any money with a company and product that is almost unheard of, I have no such issues convincing businesses to spend 10k on Adobe products however. Regards Dale Fraser Hi Dale, here my comments to your concerns: 1. security Railo does not claim to be absolutely secure in terms of weaknesses or security holes. Nor do we claim to be more secure than other engines in this terms. But just give me your thoughts about these matters: How do you prevent users from different webs in one instance of: - accessing other datasources (without having different db-users etc) - accessing all mappings - accessing all customtags - accessing all cfx-tags - allowing some webs to access the file system and others not - allowing some users to use java objects and others not this is the type of security i addressed. 2. performance I agree on that. I just compared Railo to the existing engines. And we will look for ways of improving performance if MX8 is faster than Railo 1.1 3. pricing I do not know what pricing you relate. Since the enterprise version is much cheaper than the ones of BD and MX. For those who just need the professional version it is the same. And there in addition is the free community version. And yes, we can argue about the features. In fact i see it the other way round. But in addition I have to say that, since I am from Railo :-) Gert Dale Fraser wrote: > 1. Security > Says Who? Once you have a decent sized user base with people testing for > security weaknesses, I really don't see how you can claim this. Just because > you and your limited user base hasn't found security holes doesn't mean they > don't exist. I also bet that almost every CFer in here will say that > Coldfusion is very secure, I've never had any issues. > > 2. Performance > What's that saying on stats, CF8 is supposed to be much faster again so lets ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Well Dale, the question was about hosting :-) Railo will make it's way. I'm sure, but it will take time... Gert Dale Fraser schrieb: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Gert Franz said: > > I read all the posts from you guys saying that there should be no > reason  to host Railo since it is only compatible to version MX 6.1. > And you  know you are absolutely right, if you do not care for: > - security I don't care about security as long as my part in the whole picture is far from the weakest link. And realistically, every CFML runtime is far from the weakest link: users are. > - performance I don't care. I really don't. No CFML runtime is magically going to make a database faster. No CFML runtime is magically going to make a remote webservice faster. And those are the types of resources I have performance issues with. > - price Not an issue in the market segment I work most of the time. But that is not to say that Railo doesn't have good stuff. The one thing  that really stands out is the concept of a site that immediately is a security container for file access. Perfect for shared hosting. I love it. I have even asked Macromedia to copy it. But is simply not relevant in my current work. I think that once Railo 1.1 is out I will put it in the buildfarm again so our applications run automatic regression tests against it. I like having applications that work on more then one runtime so if it is feasible, I will keep an eye open for portability issues. But realistically, I think that it will be years before anything we work with will be deployed on Railo even if we officially support it. Jochem

For what it's worth, if Railo went open source.. now *THAT* would be interesting...

why? what's the difference between open source and free? Rick Root schrieb: > For what it's worth, if Railo went open source.. now *THAT* would be > interesting...

A huge difference!! Number one is that you have the entire community helping to develop the project,  so bug fixes and features are done in record time instead of waiting on a "few" developers to bring you the things that you need the most. Why has mySql done so well? Gee I will answer that myself. MySql offers an open source product and were able to grow their client base while at the same time having the people that downloaded their software also develop their software and reduce their costs. Free and closed source simply means that we have to wait for you to implemnt things and that it takes longer for community acceptance. Doug B. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Doug Brown said: > A huge difference!! Number one is that you have the entire community > helping to develop the project, Really? Look at that thread about the Smith project. How many people have said they would actually help? Jochem

Well I think it has to become open source before all the offerings come piling in. I am sure the bandwagon did not get full for mySql until it was opensourced. Could be wrong though :/ Doug B. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

How many people on this list are actually proficient in Java?  Most CF people don't have a CS background, and a few who do, are probably too busy to help out.   I know some Java, and although I'm fairly busy, I would like to lend a hand. Where do I sign up? Russ ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Doug Brown wrote: > MySql offers an open source product and were able to grow their client base > while at the same time having the people that downloaded their software also > develop their software and reduce their costs. Free and closed source simply > means that we have to wait for you to implemnt things and that it takes > longer for community acceptance. > I think the part about having the people that download the software also develop it is not accurate.  If you look at mysql's site and their own description of their "community", there isn't a lot of mention of "development". http://dev.mysql.com/guilds/ Note that the "Developers Guild" only has 8 members...and it refers to development other than the core product development.  My guess is that all of the core development of MySQL is done by a MySQL-AB employee. Having an open source community probably can reduce costs...most likely in marketing (all those people in the writers, speakers and experts Guilds) and QA.  But my impression of most open source projects is that the actual development is done by a very small number of developers, perhaps a similar size team to a commercial product, and that implementing new features and bug fixes...in general...works on a similar timeline as a commercial product.

Jim, You might be right, but I also think that if something is open source that the people with the right skill set could very well push along the development of project. Say Joe Blow has been a java developer for ten years and also uses coldfusion, he could very well implement new features and bug fixes that the core dev team did not have time for and allow them to work on other areas. Now depending on how many Joes are out there would decide how fast a product progresses. Doug B. > Doug Brown wrote: > > MySql offers an open source product and were able to grow their client base > > while at the same time having the people that downloaded their software also > > develop their software and reduce their costs. Free and closed source simply ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Don't get me wrong, I do not have anything against open source. BUT we are yet to small and I don't think that the community will dig into our tens of thousands of lines of code first to understand it and second to fix it. If Adobe would do it, then this would be different. If we open source Railo and we would be faster in some cases than other vendors, they could easily adapt our code And just like James posted. If you have a decompiler etc. it is already open source. Greetings / Grüsse Gert Franz Customer Care Railo Technologies GmbH gert.franz@railo.ch www.railo.ch Join our Mailing List / Treten Sie unserer Mailingliste bei: deutsch: http://de.groups.yahoo.com/group/railo/ english: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/railo_talk/ Doug Brown schrieb: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

>If we open source Railo and we would be faster in some >cases than other >vendors, they could easily adapt our code Sure they could adopt your code and make their product faster, but they would also still be charging a wholloping price for their product. Doug B. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- helping > > to develop the project,  so bug fixes and features are done in record time > > instead of waiting on a "few" developers to bring you the things that you > > need the most. Why has mySql done so well? Gee I will answer that myself. > > MySql offers an open source product and were able to grow their client base > > while at the same time having the people that downloaded their software also > > develop their software and reduce their costs. Free and closed source simply ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Just a side note, or question...What reasons do people think that asp/php has the stronghold on web development, and what can be done to make CF just as popular? A. Better performing code B. Cheaper development C. Cheaper hosting D. Other (Explain) Doug

I think ASP/PHP do have cheaper hosting, and the whole selling point is that it's free.  The fact that it will take longer to develop an app is not immediately clear, and neither is that fact that ASP/PHP code is more complicated and therefore will have more bugs.   ASP also probably performs better then CF.  From what I hear, Bluedragon .NET performs better then CF, and doesn't have the memory problems that CF does.   Also if you want to have any sort of load balanced environment, I believe ASP has it built in somewhere (haven't really looked into it), and it's free, while for CF you have to shell out $12000 (2 Enterprise Licenses). Even if you have a fairly low traffic site, but you would like to have a load balanced environment, it's going to cost you a lot of money to get there.  (If you need session replication at least).  Also, from what I've been told, session replication doesn't work reliably with CF, although I have not experienced problems myself. Another issue is that it doesn't scale easily.  Not that CF can't scale, but if I have an a CF App that cost me $x to develop, and a ASP.NET app that cost me $2x to develop, if I need to scale it out with multiple servers, at some point the cost of the licenses for the new servers outweigh the cost of developing the app in the first place.  The fact that you can run CF on linux and forego windows licensing costs offsets this somewhat, but there's still a significant difference.  This is most likely why MySpace is moving towards .NET.   I don't think PHP has any sort of session management, so it's not even a contender in the enterprise world.   Personally, I don't know PHP or ASP.NET, but I should probably start learning them.   Russ ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

>and neither is that fact that ASP/PHP code is more >complicated and therefore will have more bugs. I find the opposite Russ coming from PHP to CF Cf is alot more verbose than PHP. I am learning CF as I work for a CF shop FullTime as a Web Systems Developer. Cant speak for ASP >I don't think PHP has any sort of session management, so it's not even a >contender in the enterprise world. Can you elaborate on this?? I use session vars all the time in php. I have done apps for Verizon that are php. Eric ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

> >and neither is that fact that ASP/PHP code is more > >complicated and therefore will have more bugs. That's a fairly ridiculous assertion -- first of all that one specific language is more complicated than another and second that complexity = bugs. One could makes all sorts of similar unsupported arguments that we've all heard: "PHP is less prone to bugs because it's open" "PHP is more prone to bugs because it's open" "ASP is more prone to bugs because it's on Windows" etc, etc Some of the most common bugs I've seen in web apps I've dealt with (commercial, open souce, and inhouse) tend to be simple user error like not checking parameters for type/content (eg SQL injection). Other common errors are off-by-one errors in loops and simply bad logic. Few programming languages prevent a developer from doing something dumb that causes a bug. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- The assertions CF folks make about open source always just make me cringe. Of *course* PHP has session management, and quite frankly some far more sophisticated options including session clustering that actually works under load (eg memcached) as opposed to the JRun session clustering that has known issues with performance thanks to what it's doing with JINI and who knows what else. Plus you've got more options about where you store the session (eg files on the server instead of database or memory directly). <rant> In the past few days, I've seen far too many posts that didn't even take the time to Wikipedia/google/whatever before making assertions about open source licenses, the capabilities of languages they've never used, or even verify or source statments that were "the truth". Please check your facts, even just briefly before you post. Or save as a draft, come back an hour later, and still see if you want to post it. </rant> Send your complaints about the rant to /dev/null :) -- John Paul Ashenfelter CTO/Transitionpoint (blog) http://www.ashenfelter.com (email) ashenfelterj@transitionpoint.com

----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- I don't think anyone is saying that PHP is more or less prone to bugs because it's open.  PHP (the language) has its own bugs/CF has it's own, but I wasn't talking about the bugs in the language itself.  I was talking about bugs in the code.  CF is so simple, that a lot of non-technical people learn it and are able to create fairly bug free sites.   As I've admitted, I am not very familiar with PHP/ASP, but I do believe that CF does prevent inexperienced developers from making mistakes.  I don't think I've seen working SQL injection code for CF and MS SQL to date, but I could be wrong...   CF auto escapes the query for you, so that the risk of SQL Injection is greatly reduced, if not eliminated.   I haven't worked with PHP/ASP, but from the code samples, I looked at, they both seem to be more verbose, and nothing comes even close to the simplicity of the CFQUERY tag.   <sarcasm>I don't know about you guys, but personally, I love storing my database usernames and passwords in my code.  </sarcasm> Now I'm not sure if PHP/ASP have any facilities that let you abstract the connection information (ASP might through windows datasources, but they're more difficult to create).   ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- I'm sorry I didn't do my research, but I did mention that I don't have a lot of experience with PHP/ASP.  Nice to know that PHP has good session clustering... I think one of the nice things about this list, is if you say something that's not true, someone will call you on it.   Plus If I feel that CF is better, and that PHP and ASP don't come close, that it must be true.  And that's the truthiness of it.   Russ

> I don't think anyone is saying that PHP is more or less prone to bugs > because it's open.  PHP (the language) has its own bugs/CF has it's own, but > I wasn't talking about the bugs in the language itself.  I was talking about > bugs in the code.  CF is so simple, that a lot of non-technical people learn > it and are able to create fairly bug free sites. I was talking about bugs in code too -- SQL injection, XSS, bad logic, etc. And I'd argue personally and professionally using dozens of sites I've been hired to work on as a basis, that since CF *is* so simple, it's more likely that there are deadly bugs in the code -- even now, years into the existence of CF, I see CFQUERY without CFQUERYPARAM around form or url variables. I also see plenty of files uploaded to web accessible directories through web forms. Wow, it sure was easy for the developer to add the capability to hose both the database and the entire server with those bugs respectively. Does that happen in other languages, sure. But easy doesn't mean a thing about bug-free. > As I've admitted, I am not very familiar with PHP/ASP, but I do believe that > CF does prevent inexperienced developers from making mistakes. Not one bit. There's no automatic type checking. There's no automatic database parameterization. There's no few options for input validation and cleansing built in, etc etc. I'm not arguing that those things are required by a language, but I *am* disputing the assertion that because CF is "easy" that it prevents inexperienced developers from making mistakes. Truthfully, I'd be more inclined to argue that languages like Java and Python _prevent_ inexperienced developers from making mistakes because many inexperienced developers simply don't understand them :)   I don't > think I've seen working SQL injection code for CF and MS SQL to date, but I > could be wrong...   CF auto escapes the query for you, so that the risk of > SQL Injection is greatly reduced, if not eliminated. That's ridiculous. CF autoescapes quotes -- that's got *nothing* to do with SQL injection. And it's *easy* to demonstrate it in CF -- here's one from DevNet to get you started http://www.adobe.com/devnet/coldfusion/articles/cfqueryparam.html > Plus If I feel that CF is better, and that PHP and ASP don't come close, > that it must be true.  And that's the truthiness of it. I appreciate and respect your right to your beliefs -- unfortunately I believe that you shouldn't propose that your ideas or beliefs are facts when it is clear that 30s of google would show them inaccurate. It wastes time, bandwidth, and adds data to the collective mailing list to sort through to get to the real, useful stuff. Unlike this message :) -- John Paul Ashenfelter CTO/Transitionpoint (blog) http://www.ashenfelter.com (email) ashenfelterj@transitionpoint.com

Russ wrote: > I don't think PHP has any sort of session management, so it's not even a > contender in the enterprise world. > > Personally, I don't know PHP or ASP.NET, but I should probably start > learning them. Don't take this the wrong way Russ, but if you don't know PHP, how do you justify talking about it's feature set? Even more so, you then take that baseless and false feature set comment and use it to justify a comment about PHP's presence in the enterprise - something which you are clearly not at all acquainted with. It would be wise of you to consider your words before you make broad, unfounded, and completely false statements about something you admittedly do not know about. For the record, PHP does indeed have session management, and I know several "enterprise-level" companies who rely on it heavily. Warm regards, Jordan Michaels Vivio Technologies http://www.viviotech.net/ Blue Dragon Alliance Member jordan@viviotech.net Russ wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- I said I don't think that PHP has session management, and I expected someone on this list to correct me if I was wrong.  You and John did, and I thank you for that. Russ

At least CFC instances can't be replicated by underlying J2EE platform since they can't implement serializable interface. >there.  (If you need session replication at least).  Also, from what I've >been told, session replication doesn't work reliably with CF, although I >have not experienced problems myself.

I think that cost is one of the biggest issues. Every other programmer I've spoken with about CF thinks that you have to BUY the server just to host a single CF site. It's like they don't even realize that there might be CF based hosting companies. I also think that while there's a decent amount of KICKING CF projects, there needs to be WAY more, and they need to be way better publicized. Look at the stuff that 37 Signals is doing. They're totally piggybacking on the popularity of Rails and offering up this fantastic software that just works. Just a side note, or question...What reasons do people think that asp/php has the stronghold on web development, and what can be done to make CF just as popular? A. Better performing code B. Cheaper development C. Cheaper hosting D. Other (Explain) Doug

> I also think that while there's a decent amount of KICKING CF projects, > there needs to be WAY more, and they need to be way better publicized. Look > at the stuff that 37 Signals is doing. They're totally piggybacking on the > popularity of Rails and offering up this fantastic software that just works. Well, since the guys at 37Signals *created* Rails, it's not a suprise they're piggybacking on it. One of their big talks is about extracting Rails (the framework) from Basecamp (the product). Hype serves them on both sides of the coin -- pushing their framework and their product(s) built on it. And as apparently will be my mission in the CF world, I'll just remind you Rails => framework Ruby => language I'd still say *ruby* is not as popular or well known as *rails* is, and that Ruby is probably comparable in popularity to CF in that it's *way* behind languages like C#, Java, and PHP. Of course *Rails* is probably one of the bigger *frameworks*, right up there with Struts. And finally, it doesn't take a *lot* of "kicking" ColdFusion sites to get it hyped -- it takes 1 popular, kicking, hyped site. There's a *lot* of Rails sites, but Basecamp is the one most folks know. CF needs a similar exemplar, but it will take the whole package of CF and a framework, etc -- the CF frameworks need a lot more work before they compare to what's hyped about Rails. Flex is far more likely to be able to generate hype IMHO. -- John Paul Ashenfelter CTO/Transitionpoint (blog) http://www.ashenfelter.com (email) ashenfelterj@transitionpoint.com

That's my point... Thanks Doug... Doug Brown schrieb: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

I did not make your point :) You have to have some sort of niche in order to get your product to be seen as a viable solution/alternative. Who cares if Adobe adopts some of your code if they are still charging $6000 per cpu for enterprise licensing. Your product would be open source and you could still have a enterprise edition that you charge for albeit at a lower price. Doug B. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- other ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- software ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- takes ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

But that's the thing Gert... If you DO open source it, nothing would change on your end except that people who WANT to get involved COULD get involved. So even if no one decided to help out, you wouldn't be losing anything. And you never know...people could jump on board and Railo could get a serious jump start. Don't get me wrong, I do not have anything against open source. BUT we are yet to small and I don't think that the community will dig into our tens of thousands of lines of code first to understand it and second to fix it. If Adobe would do it, then this would be different. If we open source Railo and we would be faster in some cases than other vendors, they could easily adapt our code And just like James posted. If you have a decompiler etc. it is already open source. Greetings / Grüsse Gert Franz Customer Care Railo Technologies GmbH gert.franz@railo.ch www.railo.ch Join our Mailing List / Treten Sie unserer Mailingliste bei: deutsch: http://de.groups.yahoo.com/group/railo/ english: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/railo_talk/ Doug Brown schrieb: > A huge difference!! Number one is that you have the entire community > helping to develop the project,  so bug fixes and features are done in > record time instead of waiting on a "few" developers to bring you the > things that you need the most. Why has mySql done so well? Gee I will answer that myself. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Not much when you have a decompiler on hand :-) Oops, did I say that out loud? ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

lol ;) Doug B. > Not much when you have a decompiler on hand :-) Oops, did I say that out loud? ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Hah! h4x0r! ;o) Rey... James Holmes wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Open source means you're offering up the source code for anyone to modify. It also means that when someone modifies your source code, they have to give it back to the community (you) for others to use. why? what's the difference between open source and free? Rick Root schrieb: > For what it's worth, if Railo went open source.. now *THAT* would be > interesting... > > >

Andy Matthews said: > Open source means you're offering up the source code for anyone to > modify. It also means that when someone modifies your source code, > they have to give it back to the community (you) for others to use. No it doesn't. Even the most viral licenses for software only require you to publish your modifications when you distribute a derived work. And the licenses that are not copyleft do not require any source code distribution at all. Jochem

Okay...thanks for correcting me Jochem. I didn't realize the difference. Andy Matthews said: > Open source means you're offering up the source code for anyone to > modify. It also means that when someone modifies your source code, > they have to give it back to the community (you) for others to use. No it doesn't. Even the most viral licenses for software only require you to publish your modifications when you distribute a derived work. And the licenses that are not copyleft do not require any source code distribution at all. Jochem

> Open source means you're offering up the source code for anyone to modify. > It also means that when someone modifies your source code, they have to > give > it back to the community (you) for others to use. Depends on the license.  I use the BSD license.  There are no requirments that modifications come back to me for inclusion.  Heck, someone could take CFFM, making some mods, encrypt it and sell it.  (RabidCFFM, anyone?) ... under the BSD license, they could do that as long s they included my original license file in the distribution. rick

Rick Root wrote: > For what it's worth, if Railo went open source.. now *THAT* would be > interesting... > The combination of a open source & shared hosting optimized CF runtime is where I see some possibilities.  Perhaps if one of the big hosting companies (HMS or GoDaddy seem like likely candidates), would put some resources into developing such a beast, it might have a chance.  I'm not sure the "community" at large has enough momentum to develop a "general purpose" alternative to CF or BD.  It seems like another CF product, be it commercial or open source, Railo or Smith, would need to fill some niche...and being shared hosting optimized would probably be the most likely candidate.  I believe Railo has a good start in this area...not sure about Smith.

I disagree with this in this market. Railo could go open-source, but it wouldn't make much difference   apart from perception. This community (I am sorry if I offend anybody) doesn't have the   number of people that can program in Java yet. I have had a few   people offer to help with CFEclipse (which is open source and free)   but many people add "If I only knew more Java" Now, you have a CFML engine, written in Java, how many people are   going to jump on it to fix it? From the CF community? Just an observation. MD On 7 Feb 2007, at 14:26, Jim Wright wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Mark, you are absolutely right. That was my point. The only thing that's different when going open source is the fact that it is open source. And of course intersted competitors could go and peek in our code. A lot of projects who went open source were no longer payed attention to. And we don't want this to happen to Railo. In the Java world nobody cares about CF. So why should a really good programmer dig into our code for error checking etc. Gert Mark Drew schrieb: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

I dunno, CF4.5 and CF5 were solid. MX was crap in every way, 6.1 and up... Solid again. But yeah, I am not sure how anyone can say that Railo is better than any other CFML engine in every way?! "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Gateway House, 28 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DN, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com At the risk of sounding like a complete *@^&!, why would >anyone< want to go backwards and use Railo?  I mean, it's still not even compatible with CF MX.  I'm sure I speak for an extremely high percentage of CFers out there when I say, "Thank God we're not in the pre-MX days anymore!"  (For those who never were in the pre-MX days, trust me, you're happy about it.) ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

"for CFFM because CFFM "out of the box" doesn't work with Railo." Who's fault is that? Does CFFM work on ColdFusion and BD with no changes? Surely if it is CFML then it should be Adobe based CFML as the benchmark, guide. N "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Gateway House, 28 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DN, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com > > I agree, unless your giving it away, I wouldn't pay for hosting on > anything > other than the official product, I only stand to loose stuff and gain > nothing. I recommend Bluedragon hosting for some of my clients who get VPS accounts at VivioTech, but only because BlueDragon 6.2 is almost completely compatible with CFMX 6.1 - and most of the stuff I write for the open source world, I try to make compatible with Bluedragon - and it's not that difficult. As for Railo... I've never worked with it, but I know that Gert has sent me changes for CFFM because CFFM "out of the box" doesn't work with Railo. Rick -- > I'm not certified, but I have been told that I'm certifiable... > Visit http://www.opensourcecf.com today!

Hi Neil, i can easily post why this is: Railo, for a good reason which I will post down below does not support the following. 1: <cfset a = structNew()> 2: <cfset a["sub.subkey"] = "John"> 3: <cfset b = a.sub.subkey> <--- this throwhs an error since a does not contain a key named "sub". It just contains a key named "sub.subkey". And all the texts in CFFM are defined like this. So I had to write a function for converting the keys into real structs. In fact in the above code in line 2 the statement does not insert a key named "sub" in the struct "a" and in the key "sub" a subkey named "subkey". The struct really contains a struct with one single key named "sub.subkey". You can easily check this by dumping it out in CFMX. In order for our blog to work I adapted CFFM for Raymond Camden's blog as well, which did not work out of the box as well since it contained some syntax errors which Railo mentions and MX ignores. Now for the reason why Railo does not support this: performance. The checking for subkeys in a struct has to be done at every single access to a struct variable. This slows down performance. Maybe this is one of the reasons why structs are many times faster in Railo than in CFMX. Greetings / Grüsse Gert Franz Customer Care Railo Technologies GmbH gert.franz@railo.ch www.railo.ch Join our Mailing List / Treten Sie unserer Mailingliste bei: deutsch: http://de.groups.yahoo.com/group/railo/ english: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/railo_talk/ Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) schrieb: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- (For the record, that code wasn't written by me, it was in a really old version of a resource bundle cfc I used... nonetheless, the code works fine in Bluedragon and CFMX with no changes) rick > -- > I'm not certified, but I have been told that I'm certifiable... > Visit http://www.opensourcecf.com today!

That indeed was and is true. But since changes could be easily be made, I don't agree to change the behaviour of Railo in order to support this syntax and loose performance in exchange. Gert Rick Root schrieb: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Interesting, surely you should get Adobe to change ColdFusion to be as fast as Railo (though I haven't seen or used Railo so I would have take your work that it is faster!) "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Gateway House, 28 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DN, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com Hi Neil, i can easily post why this is: Railo, for a good reason which I will post down below does not support the following. 1: <cfset a = structNew()> 2: <cfset a["sub.subkey"] = "John"> 3: <cfset b = a.sub.subkey> <--- this throwhs an error since a does not contain a key named "sub". It just contains a key named "sub.subkey". And all the texts in CFFM are defined like this. So I had to write a function for converting the keys into real structs. In fact in the above code in line 2 the statement does not insert a key named "sub" in the struct "a" and in the key "sub" a subkey named "subkey". The struct really contains a struct with one single key named "sub.subkey". You can easily check this by dumping it out in CFMX. In order for our blog to work I adapted CFFM for Raymond Camden's blog as well, which did not work out of the box as well since it contained some syntax errors which Railo mentions and MX ignores. Now for the reason why Railo does not support this: performance. The checking for subkeys in a struct has to be done at every single access to a struct variable. This slows down performance. Maybe this is one of the reasons why structs are many times faster in Railo than in CFMX. Greetings / Grüsse Gert Franz Customer Care Railo Technologies GmbH gert.franz@railo.ch www.railo.ch Join our Mailing List / Treten Sie unserer Mailingliste bei: deutsch: http://de.groups.yahoo.com/group/railo/ english: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/railo_talk/ Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) schrieb: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- the > intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note > that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the > information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have > received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call > our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- source > world, I try to make compatible with Bluedragon - and it's not that > difficult. > > As for Railo... I've never worked with it, but I know that Gert has sent me > changes for CFFM because CFFM "out of the box" doesn't work with Railo. > > Rick > >  

Just a tiny hint is this... http://www.markdrew.co.uk/blog/index.cfm/2006/11/27/Comparing-Component-speed-on-different-CFML-engines Greetings / Grüsse Gert Franz Customer Care Railo Technologies GmbH gert.franz@railo.ch www.railo.ch Join our Mailing List / Treten Sie unserer Mailingliste bei: deutsch: http://de.groups.yahoo.com/group/railo/ english: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/railo_talk/ Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) schrieb: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Well, this is by no means an indicator of how well or bad CF/Railo performs on the whole with components/structures, there are far too many factors not accounted for and in the authors own words, should be taken with a pinch of salt and are not scientific. For one, it was on a Mac and I doubt anyone runs a production site on their MacBook! "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Gateway House, 28 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DN, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com Just a tiny hint is this... http://www.markdrew.co.uk/blog/index.cfm/2006/11/27/Comparing-Component-spee d-on-different-CFML-engines Greetings / Grüsse Gert Franz Customer Care Railo Technologies GmbH gert.franz@railo.ch www.railo.ch Join our Mailing List / Treten Sie unserer Mailingliste bei: deutsch: http://de.groups.yahoo.com/group/railo/ english: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/railo_talk/ Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) schrieb: > Interesting, surely you should get Adobe to change ColdFusion to be as fast > as Railo (though I haven't seen or used Railo so I would have take your work ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- the > intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note > that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the > information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have > received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call > our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- CFMX. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- the >> information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- accounts ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Yes Neil, you are absolutely right. That's what I wrote myself in the comments. Tests have to be done by independent companies and in addition they have to test a lot of stuff, not only on single issue. And I can not publish such a test as well since an independent company is objective. I would encourage such a test, but I won't do it myself. My quote about performance is just something our customers and as well we seem to see. Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) schrieb: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Indeed, so if I said ColdFusion was faster than Railo at everything then there would be just as much basis in that - this is my point.  I am not putting Railo down in any way, I will never use it, but to say it is faster just on "observation" is just wrong unless backed up by proper tests and metrics. "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Gateway House, 28 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DN, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com Yes Neil, you are absolutely right. That's what I wrote myself in the comments. Tests have to be done by independent companies and in addition they have to test a lot of stuff, not only on single issue. And I can not publish such a test as well since an independent company is objective. I would encourage such a test, but I won't do it myself. My quote about performance is just something our customers and as well we seem to see. Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) schrieb: > Well, this is by no means an indicator of how well or bad CF/Railo performs > on the whole with components/structures, there are far too many factors not > accounted for and in the authors own words, should be taken with a pinch of > salt and are not scientific. > > For one, it was on a Mac and I doubt anyone runs a production site on their > MacBook! >  

I hope somewhen you will revert the statement "I will never use it" :-) Why don't you "observe" it yoursef? Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) schrieb: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Lol, mainly due the fact that as a company we would never move from ColdFusion (too much corporate issues). We looked at BD.NET when we thought we would use more .NET stuff but in the end, there was no need to move and far too much risk. "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Gateway House, 28 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DN, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com I hope somewhen you will revert the statement "I will never use it" :-) Why don't you "observe" it yoursef? Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) schrieb: > Indeed, so if I said ColdFusion was faster than Railo at everything then > there would be just as much basis in that - this is my point.  I am not > putting Railo down in any way, I will never use it, but to say it is faster ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- the > intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note > that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the > information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have > received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call > our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

>>Most CF people don't have a CS background Where did you get this info from? How many people on this list are actually proficient in Java?  Most CF people don't have a CS background, and a few who do, are probably too busy to help out.   I know some Java, and although I'm fairly busy, I would like to lend a hand. Where do I sign up? Russ ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Just in general working and talking with CF people and at conferences.  It seems to me that because CF is so easy to learn, a lot of the people using it are coming from non CS backgrounds.  Now it might be just people I'm coming in contact with, but that's been my experience.   Can we maybe set up a poll somewhere and test out this hypothesis?   Russ ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

That would be an interesting poll, would prove if I wasted a lot of money getting my cs degree :) I think it would be useful to see of the percentages, who works for a company or does contractor work Just in general working and talking with CF people and at conferences.  It seems to me that because CF is so easy to learn, a lot of the people using it are coming from non CS backgrounds.  Now it might be just people I'm coming in contact with, but that's been my experience.   Can we maybe set up a poll somewhere and test out this hypothesis?   Russ ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- This has been my experience as well. CF makes development easier - bad development as well as good development. > That's ridiculous. CF autoescapes quotes -- that's got > *nothing* to do with SQL injection. And it's *easy* to > demonstrate it in CF -- here's one from DevNet to get you > started > http://www.adobe.com/devnet/coldfusion/articles/cfqueryparam.html Escaping quotes does make SQL injection a little harder, but far from impossible. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta, Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location. Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information!

> Escaping quotes does make SQL injection a little harder, but far from > impossible. <cfparam name="url.id" default="0; delete from myTable;"> <cfquery ... > select * from myTable where id=#url.id# </cfquery> If I'm not mistaken - that would only work in SQL Server, right? cuz only SQL server lets you pass through multiple queries all at once. Rick

> <cfparam name="url.id" default="0; delete from myTable;"> ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- Well, it's a bit more complicated than that. The ability to batch SQL commands depends on database drivers, not the actual database, I think. Also, not all SQL injection attacks rely on SQL batching - some involve causing database errors, some involve comments, etc. Google "second-order SQL injection" for more info. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta, Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location. Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information!

> There are plenty of reasons to use Railo, but before I get > into that, can you give an example of an important CFMX > feature that Railo lacks? Flash Remoting? Event Gateway? Recordsets from stored procedures? Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta, Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location. Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information!

>Flash Remoting? Not sure I consider that an /important/ feature myself. Eitherway, I think its fair to say that CFMX is always going to be best option for anyone doing Flash/Flex integration stuff. >Event Gateway? Ok, but one could argue that this is also absent from CFMX standard. >Recordsets from stored procedures? Fair enough. Not something I've needed in my personal stuff, but we do use them at work, and it'd probably be a pain trying to solve it without cfstoredproc. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Flash Remoting is supported by Railo 1.0. But only the calls to .cfm files. A AMF Filter is included. Railo 1.1 Event gateways: we won't implement this feature yet. We need to leave arguments for others :-) Recordsets from stored procedures: In 1.0 it is possible to call stored procedures in <cfquery>. Railo 1.1 will support <cfstoredproc*> What about the others? struct(), array(), query(), arrayfind(), dump(), <cfdump eval="">, <cfadmin> Server and web administrator? I know we still have work to do. But we will... Gert Dave Watts schrieb: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Sorry Railo 1.1 will support calls to .cfc's as well... Gert Franz schrieb: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

>In 1.0 it is possible to call stored procedures in <cfquery>. Railo 1.1 >will support <cfstoredproc*> I thought that was the case, but I did a quick test with MySQL 5 and it didn't appear to work. The procedure was just a sample one I found: CREATE PROCEDURE molo() SELECT 'Molo'; And when trying to do this: <cfquery name="Bob" datasource="Test"> CALL molo() </cfquery> I got this: null, message from server: "PROCEDURE test.molo can't return a result set in the given context" Did I do something wrong?

For stored procedure Railo has    <cfstoredproc*> Just like Adobe CFMX from online help <!--- This view-only example executes a Sybase stored procedure that returns three result sets, two of which we want. The stored procedure returns the status code and one output parameter, which we display. We use named notation for the parameters. ---> <!--- <cfstoredproc procedure = "foo_proc"   dataSource = "MY_SYBASE_TEST" username = "sa"   password = "" dbServer = "scup" dbName = "pubs2"    returnCode = "Yes" debug = "Yes">    <cfprocresult name = RS1>    <cfprocresult name = RS3 resultSet = 3>    <cfprocparam type = "IN"       CFSQLType = CF_SQL_INTEGER  value = "1" dbVarName = @param1>    <cfprocparam type = "OUT" CFSQLType = CF_SQL_DATE  variable = FOO dbVarName = @param2> </cfstoredproc> ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Indeed, and you always will as in all reality it will be Adobe who define the CFML language (albeit not official") and any competing engine will always be behind that set.  Of course there are times when new systems provide additional functionality but any one expecting CFML will expect the the base minimum which ColdFusion provides I would think.    "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Gateway House, 28 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DN, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com Flash Remoting is supported by Railo 1.0. But only the calls to .cfm files. A AMF Filter is included. Railo 1.1 Event gateways: we won't implement this feature yet. We need to leave arguments for others :-) Recordsets from stored procedures: In 1.0 it is possible to call stored procedures in <cfquery>. Railo 1.1 will support <cfstoredproc*> What about the others? struct(), array(), query(), arrayfind(), dump(), <cfdump eval="">, <cfadmin> Server and web administrator? I know we still have work to do. But we will... Gert Dave Watts schrieb: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

But I don't see any reason why competing engines can't further growth in the "official" engine. A perfect case is Macromedia and Adobe's competition in the WYSIWYG editor (Dreamweaver vs Go-Live) or even better in the image editor (Fireworks vs Imageready). Adobe and Macromedia ALWAYS leapfrogged each other in features until of course Adobe bought MM. There's no reason why Adobe can't implement features from other engines. [mailto:Neil.Robertson-Ravo@csd.reedexpo.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 5:03 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Anyone interested in Railo hosting? Indeed, and you always will as in all reality it will be Adobe who define the CFML language (albeit not official") and any competing engine will always be behind that set.  Of course there are times when new systems provide additional functionality but any one expecting CFML will expect the the base minimum which ColdFusion provides I would think.    "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Gateway House, 28 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DN, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com Flash Remoting is supported by Railo 1.0. But only the calls to .cfm files. A AMF Filter is included. Railo 1.1 Event gateways: we won't implement this feature yet. We need to leave arguments for others :-) Recordsets from stored procedures: In 1.0 it is possible to call stored procedures in <cfquery>. Railo 1.1 will support <cfstoredproc*> What about the others? struct(), array(), query(), arrayfind(), dump(), <cfdump eval="">, <cfadmin> Server and web administrator? I know we still have work to do. But we will... Gert Dave Watts schrieb: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Very true. The way I see it, is that if a competing engine had all the features of Adobe's product plus a few enhancements of their own, then the switch would be moderately painless (with a few exceptions). We keep talking about tags and functions that are missing in these competitors (Smith & Railo) but there is alot of other stuff such as failover, load balancing, clustering & flash integration that are going to be big players in people making a switch, unless you are talking about the mom & pop clients. There is indeed alot of growing room for these two competitors. I really do not care what anyone says, you cannot take something that is only a couple years old and turn it into something that has over ten or more years head start on you overnight. Doug B. > But I don't see any reason why competing engines can't further growth in the > "official" engine. A perfect case is Macromedia and Adobe's competition in > the WYSIWYG editor (Dreamweaver vs Go-Live) or even better in the image > editor (Fireworks vs Imageready). > > Adobe and Macromedia ALWAYS leapfrogged each other in features until of > course Adobe bought MM. There's no reason why Adobe can't implement features ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- the ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- the > intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note > that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the > information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have > received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call > our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this > communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." > Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com > > Flash Remoting > is supported by Railo 1.0. But only the calls to .cfm files. A AMF Filter is ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- will ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- <cfadmin> ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

I agree, thank you Andy. We first plan to buy Adobe and then Microsoft, if they don't implement some of our features :-) We will adapt everything the market needs in order to make switches from another engine to Railo as easy as possible. Large CMS like Contens, a sophisticated MachII application now runs both on Railo and CFMX with no changes in code. Gert Andy Matthews schrieb: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

> Adobe and Macromedia ALWAYS leapfrogged each other in features until of > course Adobe bought MM. There's no reason why Adobe can't implement > features from other engines. <cough> cfthread cfinterface .. -- Tom Chiverton Helping to confidentially embrace sticky materials **************************************************** This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP. Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at St James's Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF.  A list of members is available for inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a partner in relation to Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP. Regulated by the Law Society. CONFIDENTIALITY This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be confidential or legally privileged.  If you are not the addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform any person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents.   If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008. For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com.