<div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">> Laura Brody wrote:<br>> >> I can't really say what the project scope would be like, I must admit.
<br>> >> However, write access is already there in fpCGI, which makes me wonder<br>> >> about why it isn't in fpODBC.<br>> ><br>> > It is in there. End of discussion. Consider yourself corrected.
<br>><br>> Nope. It's not. I can't connect to a filePro datastore using a third<br>> party app via ODBC. End of discussion. Consider yourself corrected.<br><br>Okay, chill. I mean, seriously...not only are you apparently confused on
<br>some key terminology and apparently unable to listen to a direct answer<br>-and- read the introductory paragraph of the filePro ODBC product page on<br>their web site (<a href="http://www.fptech.com/Products/fpodbc.shtml">
http://www.fptech.com/Products/fpodbc.shtml</a>), but you're<br>now just plain being an ass. I'm sorry, but you're really pushing it.<br>They've been polite to you through now. After that shot, I wouldn't be<br>surprised if you were sent straight to /dev/null.
</blockquote><div><br>
We've already cleared up the difference between server and client, and
that fP only offers client. My objection is that ODBC isn't
offered as a server protocol, and that most developers expect that from
a database. When I think of filePro, I think of it as a db in the
same category as MySQL or Oracle, not as a development tool for
authoring clients to other dbs. I doubt I'm alone in that.<br>
<br>
Why is it not rude for Laura to say "End of discussion. Consider yourself corrected." but not me? <br>
</div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">> Until today, I wasn't even aware that Ken was responsible for filePro<br>> development. I made a comment based on what I knew, which obviously
<br>> wasn't much, and I said so at the time. You took it is some kind of<br>> personal attack. Which it obviously wasn't, as I couldn't even name a<br><br>Gee, MIGHT it be because she's his WIFE? Ya know, if someone insulted my
<br>spouse, I'd rain seven kinds of hell down upon them, have no doubt.</blockquote><div><br>
As I said: 1, I didn't know who he was, 2, I didn't know who SHE
was, and 3, it wasn't a deliberate insult to anyone. I stated how
it looks from the outside, from the perspective of someone who hasn't
been intimately connected with fP, fPTech and it's developers.<br>
</div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">> core app developer. All I did was voice my opinion that it was either<br>> lazy programmers or bad marketing strategy that was behind the lack of
<br><br>Yeah, I think it's the "lazy" part she had a problem with, man. They're<br>married, Ken's development lead. *thwack!* What did you THINK was going<br>to come of a comment like that--chocolate and roses by FedEx? :)
</blockquote><div><br>
1, I didn't know who he was, 2, I didn't know who SHE was, and 3, it
wasn't a deliberate insult to anyone. I stated how it looks from the
outside, from the perspective of someone who hasn't been intimately
connected with fP, fPTech and it's developers.<br>
</div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">> ODBC server functionality, given that filePro has had plenty of time to<br>> develop it and that it's a widespread standard used to communicate with
<br>> DB servers (which is hardly an opinion without basis, just a poorly<br>> informed basis). You countered that it was more of a problem to do with<br>> inherent programming issues to the core applications, and I agreed that
<br>> you probably would know better than I would as fP source code and APIs<br>> are closed source and I've never had any access to fpTech. Negative is<br>> not the same as nasty. Nasty implies that I had malicious intent behind
<br>> my comments. I don't. Why would I?<br><br>You sure the hell sound it. "Consider -yourself- corrected," fired back at<br>her? Dude, I don't know laura -that- well, and I don't know you at all,<br>but you sound like you need a life preserver real quick--'cos that ice
<br>you're skating on...it's getting REAL thin, REAL fast.</blockquote><div><br>
Again, why was it not rude for her to say it, but it was for me?
If it was rude, I was justified in being rude back. If it wasn't
rude, then neither was I.<br>
</div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">And who needs knowledge of the source code to see how it doesn't fit the<br>paradigm. "IS THERE A PERSISTANT PROCESS RUNNING?" No. NOT A SERVER.
<br>"IS THE APPLICATION TIGHTLY BOUND TO THE OS?" No. NOT AN INTEGRATED<br>SERVER. See how easy that is? I don't need a line of source code. I just<br>need to look at -how- it's run.</blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
I'm starting to wonder if you've even -used- the product, at this point.<br>If you have, you obviously haven't thought much about the topic other than<br>to winge at them.</blockquote><div><br>
I use it every day, obviously, or would I bother posting? And
nope, I seldom look at how it's run. I'm using the platform to
develop and maintain code, not to develop and maintain filePro
itself. So I haven't a clue it there's a persistent process
running somewhere, to be honest - there may very well be,
somewhere. Maintaining the server environment is not part of my
duties.<br>
</div><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">What crosses the line is something I would consider in the eye of the<br>beholder in many cases. You've crossed (or damned near crossed) it
<br>already, specifically with your shot above at "correcting" Laura. </blockquote><div><br>
<shrug> You seem to be really stuck on that. Again, why can
she say it and not I? If she doesn't want to talk about it
further, there's better ways. Why not just ignore that part of
the message as not worth pursuing, or just state that "that is my final
position on the topic.", rather than 'feeding a troll'? Saying
that I'm wrong and then forbidding any further discourse on the topic
is polite?<br>
</div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Not that Laura needs anyone to defend her. She's -more- than capable. :)</blockquote>
<div><br>
Er....then why have you done it three times in the last few paragraphs?<br>
<br>
Just as an aside, I also keep pointing out that my viewpoint is that of
an outside developer who doesn't really know that much about the inner
working of fp or fpTech. Which may not be most fP developers
these days (I don't think there's a lot of people taking classes in it
at night), but is certainly most people in general. I'd also like
to point out that almost everyone considers a db backend to be a db
server. It's like saying a car should run on gasoline.
Sure, you can get a hydrogen vehicle or an electric, but it's pretty
rare; when I see the word 'car' I expect to put gas in it. One
expects a database backend to act as a server and offer ODBC
connections. Yup, fP does say that their ODBC is client only on
the website. That's not the issue here, as far as I'm
concerned. It's whether or not it shoud offer it as a server, and
what developers expect from a db backend in the year 2006. It
doesn't *matter* what fP was originally designed to do or how well it
does it, or what it currently offers, really. What matters is
what people want from it, and what it needs in order to function well
in a modern IT environment. Can I fuel my car at any gas station,
or do I have to go to a special fuel station found in only three places
in the US or build my own station everywhere I want one? For me,
ODBC is a biggie because if I had it, a lot of other objections to fP
wouldn't matter (not just mine). Alot of those objections seem to
revolve around the interface. With ODBC, I could use whatever interface
development kit I liked, plus I could integrate with other applications
far more easily.<br>
</div></div><br>
I think the topic's mostly been beaten to death now, anyway, especially
since I spent most of this email having to discuss interpersonal
dynamics. I gave my opinion as an outsider, Ken and Laura took
issue with both the opinion and how I expressed it. My reasoning
on why ODBC hadn't been implemented as a server protocol for fP was
examined and rebutted, and I deferred to their informed opinion that it
would be a big technical challange to add ODBC server functionality to
filePro. My opinion remains that it's a must have and that most
developers expect it from a database product and would think of fP in
that way rather than as a development platform with client-only ODBC,
and my impression is that fPTech doesn't see it as a cost-effective
project and so it's unlikely to ever be implemented. Fair summing
up, personal issues aside?<br>
<br>
Tyler<br>