Digital Ninja

After keeping up with Adam Haskell's frustrations with Fusebox (well, with the vested interests, to be fair) it got me thinking about what Fusebox means to me. I mean, sure, I've thought about ColdBox and ModelGlue and even on a particularly spunky day Mach-II. But each morning I wake up and I'm still a Fusebox developer after 9 or so years.

So with project Fusebox being somewhat of a rudderless ship, or coffee-less donut, or Guinness-less me (you get the picture) where does that leave the Fusebox community? As rich as it ever was, I say!

It's a great framework because it started out dead simple. I started on FB2 and then wrote most of my professional code in FB3. Man, those were the days! Pop some variables into the ole' fbx_Settings file and away you go! It was a snap to get new hires up and running. Then FB4 came, and with it came XML - some kind of new, alien acronym that looked all foreign-like. ;) We pretty much ignored that version. Then along came FB5 and I had to figure out what all the hub-bub was about, so I immersed myself in that. Now I'm a FB5 fan through and through. Yep, you heard me right - a fan of the leader-less, roadmap-less framework.

It's left behind a great legacy with the community. So many applications (many still running) and so many wise lessons learned the hard way. It taught us why a framework is good, it inspired us to try to better it (nod to the sibling frameworks) and it gave some much-needed shape to the wonderfully flexible language that Allaire- er, Macromedia- er, Adobe had given to us.

Personally, I'm going to revel in my continued embrace of Fusebox. Having a fleet of major applications deployed using that technology might have something to do with that, but it's also a feeling of trust and familiarity. Let's not forget, too. We do have FuseNG! Let's wish the Fusebox/FuseNG community further longevity, whether it be called tomayto or tomahto. Just don't call the whole thing off.