Thoughts on Kevin's announcement
rman at free.fr
Fri May 14 05:38:34 CDT 2010
Jacqueline, let me take a precise example.. i'took a license for sygodact.
It's an "old" CGI stack. So I had to install an "old" runrev engine in the
CGI folder. It would be simpler if the new on-rev engine accepted stacks
like the old one :
- It would make it easier for you to promote Zygodact. It would allow
revIgniter to sell his what seems (not yet digged into it enough) great
framework. And Andre Garzia to promote a nice tutorial about the basic of
CMS. And thus creating a kind of market because others might like/want to
produce nice tools... that would in the end make it easier for the whole lot
to produce more things. I do beleive that sharing things here and there and
"selling" libraries at a reasonnable "friendly" price is a great benefit for
all of us potentially.
- Lastly, if I go and see a potential client, and promote the on-rev server
technology offering to build their site. I'd rather leave on their server my
work as a protected stack rather than a bunch of .irev files, with which I'm
happy on my personnal on-rev sand box server.
Until then on-rev will only be useful for developpers themselves or their
hosted clients sites. It smells a little bit "closed shop". I personnaly
would hesitate as a client to be locked in 100%.
Unless you present it no more as site building and hosting but as a
"communication on the web service" like Rodéo.. !
But I beleive that there is a nice intermediate niche of CMS sites to be
really adapted to users but more efficiently with on-rev xtalk. And for that
having irev-cgi stacks running on on-rev servers would be, for me, the
View this message in context: http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Thoughts-on-Kevin-s-announcement-tp2172675p2216388.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
More information about the use-livecode