I wants to use ColdBox and rewriting the CFWheels functions as ColdBox plugins. Like If we can rely on ColdBox underneath the framework and to keep the core framework up to date?
If I understand your question correctly you are asking if Ortus will continue to keep the Ortus open-source projects (ColdBox, Wirebox, ContentBox, etc. ) updated and supported in the future? If that is your question, then I would have to say yes, very much so. The Ortus Team has proven repeatedly to be active and engaged in supporting the many Ortus open-source projects. This forum itself is proof of that.
Another example would be ForgeBox.io. I really appreciate the Ortus effort to not just put out open-source projects, but to get the entire CF community engaged and involved.
BTW, have you looked at the number of releases alone that ColdBox has had over the years? Take a look in detail here.
I have heard it said and I believe many would agree that Ortus has done more to keep the CF community moving forward than anyone else. I am sure others can chime in with examples of how Ortus has shown thier continued support of the Ortus open-source projects and thier own experiences.
1 Like
It is possible we all die in a plane crash next month and Ortus disappears overnight, but that seems unlikely. The truth is, you won’t find another company in the CF space now or in all its history which was more committed, engaged, and active than Ortus. Not even close. Like miles away. 
Every product we have is professionally-supported software with support plans, consulting, custom development, and paid bug fixes available. We have a yearly conference, roadmaps for all major products (like ColdBox MVC), regular releases, LTS releases, active community forums, and active open source contributions from the community to both our libraries and our documentation. Some companies have a money making arm and then maintain some software libraries on the side, but Ortus was formed primarily AROUND our software and all our consulting circles that core. We nearly 40 employees around the world in US-based, EU-based, and El Salvador-based organizations and our one mission is to modernize and further the CFML language and our CF-based libraries. That’s a far cry from pretty much every other framework or library CF has ever seen, run by a single individual, or a small group of volunteers.
You want to check into Modules. ColdBox hasn’t had “plugins” since version 3.
2 Likes
You’ve heard from long time users and staff at Optus. I starting exploring adopting CommandBox, ColdBox, etc for our shop at the University of Kansas (USA) almost exactly a year ago. It is my clear impression they are in this for the long haul. They’ve been 100% supportive of everything I’ve tried to do. We are in the process of converting our legacy environment to ColdBox. My only regret is we didn’t start down this path years ago. Getting started has been challenge but I’m very pleased with how far we’ve come. This environment is a joy to work in.
2 Likes
Hey @zainforbjs ,
I know the Wheels team is just exploring this option right now but I think that what Brad mentioned is an important clue in the possible implementation of Wheels 3.0. Adding Wheels as a module should be done on the latest LTS version of ColdBox in order to have enough time to flush out any bugs. From past conversations, I believe the goal would to use ColdBox’s RESTful routing and MVC architecture to replace anything duplicated in Wheels.
Also, because ColdBox is already modular and has dependency injection, Wheels could also separate out anything Wheels-specific like it’s ORM and Form Helpers as Wheels modules. This could also help with backwards compatibility.
I know this is all exploratory right now but it’s an interesting idea!
1 Like
Thanks @dbelanger for your detailed endorsement. Appreciated.
and Yes, CfWheels Team is doing good on their side launch with their new versions.