Home of the ColdFusion Community
|
Mailing Lists
|
Home /
Groups /
ColdFusion Talk (CF-Talk)
Anyone interested in Railo hosting?
Author: Gert Franz
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269284
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 -----
Author: Mark Drew
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269282
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 -----
Author: Tero Pikala
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269185
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.
Author: Tom Chiverton
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269182
> 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.
Author: Gert Franz
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269153
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 -----
Author: Doug Brown
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269152
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 -----
Author: Andy Matthews
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269146
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 -----
Author: AJ Mercer
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269085
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 -----
Author: Peter Boughton
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269084
>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?
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269083
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 -----
Author: Gert Franz
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269081
Sorry Railo 1.1 will support calls to .cfc's as well...
Gert Franz schrieb:
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Gert Franz
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269080
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 -----
Author: Peter Boughton
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269079
>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 -----
Author: Dave Watts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269074
> 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!
Author: Peter Boughton
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269073
> 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
]
Author: Peter Boughton
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269072
>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.
Author: Peter Boughton
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269071
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*
:)
Author: Dave Watts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269070
> <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!
Author: Rick Root
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269068
> 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
Author: Dave Watts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269059
----- 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!
Author: John Paul Ashenfelter
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269042
> 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
Author: Rick Root
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269026
> 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
Author: Russ
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269027
----- 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
Author: Russ
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269025
----- 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
Author: Jordan Michaels
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269024
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 -----
Author: John Paul Ashenfelter
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269023
> >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
Author: Andy Matthews
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269021
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
Author: John Paul Ashenfelter
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269018
> 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
Author: Jochem van Dieten
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269014
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
Author: Andy Matthews
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269010
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
Author: Andy Matthews
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269009
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 -----
Author: Eric Haskins
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269008
>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 -----
Author: Andy Matthews
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269007
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...
>
>
>
Author: Russ
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#269000
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 -----
Author: Turetsky, Seth
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268999
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 -----
Author: Doug Brown
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268996
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 -----
Author: Gert Franz
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268995
That's my point...
Thanks Doug...
Doug Brown schrieb:
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Doug Brown
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268994
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
Author: Doug Brown
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268991
>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 -----
Author: Russ
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268989
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 -----
Author: Gert Franz
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268988
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 -----
Author: Doug Brown
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268986
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 -----
Author: Turetsky, Seth
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268985
>>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 -----
Author: Russ
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268981
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 -----
Author: Doug Brown
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268980
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 -----
Author: Jim Wright
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268979
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.
Author: Jochem van Dieten
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268978
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
Author: Rey Bango
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268975
Hah! h4x0r! ;o)
Rey...
James Holmes wrote:
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Doug Brown
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268973
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 -----
Author: Doug Brown
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268971
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 -----
Author: James Holmes
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268972
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 -----
Author: Jim Wright
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268969
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.
Author: Gert Franz
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268966
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...
Author: Gert Franz
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268965
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 -----
Author: Rick Root
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268963
For what it's worth, if Railo went open source.. now *THAT* would be
interesting...
Author: Rick Root
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268962
----- 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!
Author: Jochem van Dieten
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268955
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
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268953
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 -----
Author: Gert Franz
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268952
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 -----
Author: Gert Franz
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268951
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 -----
Author: Dale Fraser
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268950
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 -----
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268949
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!
>
Author: Gert Franz
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268948
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 -----
Author: Gert Franz
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268947
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 -----
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268946
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 -----
Author: Gert Franz
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268945
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 -----
Author: Dale Fraser
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268944
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 -----
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268943
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
>
>
Author: Gert Franz
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268942
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 -----
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268941
"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!
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268940
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 -----
Author: Gert Franz
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268939
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 -----
Author: Rick Root
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268932
> 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!
Author: AJ Mercer
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268931
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 -----
Author: Doug Brown
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268929
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 -----
Author: Dale Fraser
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268926
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 -----
Author: Matt Quackenbush
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268924
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 -----
Author: Peter Boughton
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:50230#268923
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
|
May 24, 2012
|
Latest Fusion Authority Articles
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
