Jump to content

Talk:Visual FoxPro/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

A programming language or DBMS?

While this article didn't mention it is a DBMS, from what I knew, it should be at least a database (not sure if it has management part), right? I remembered that I did type SQL in Visual FoxPro (many years ago). Minghong 11:09, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Yes it is a DBMS. It can create, add, maintain tables, structures, indices, etc. AlexF 22:10, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

the external link to "support timeframes" is broken Which is the link to "supprt timeframes"- there is no such link that I can see. AlexF 22:10, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Regarding DBMS, I refer to FoxPro and Visual Foxpro as a RDBMS although some will differ on that (since FP and VFP do not support transaction-based rollback) --Bill W. Smith, Jr. 03:27, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Just to clarify: Visual FoxPro is both a DBMS and a programming language. VFP does support transaction-based-rollback. Non-Visual versions of FoxPro do not support any transaction based database structures. --RyanNerd 17:58, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

foxpro26 in windows 2003

i have Program made by foxpro26 , my problems are the program doesn't work in windows 2003. When i double click the program , the program doesn't respond . Do you have any idea or solution , how i can run the program in windows 2003 ? thanks

Please ask tech support questions in one of the many Fox support boards. For example: http://forums.microsoft.com/msdn/showforum.aspx?forumid=60&siteid=1 Alex Feldstein

You might find the information I am starting to compile at FoxPro 2 more helpful, including information that WILL be there very soon regarding getting FoxPro 2.6 for UNIX to run under Linux and FreeBSD. See, your first problem is that you are running Windows 2003... :) --Bill W. Smith, Jr. 03:25, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

There are is a proliferation of external links, more than usual on a Wikipedia article. Some of the links are in languages other than English (e.g. Spanish and German) and therefore they belong in their respective language cross-wikis.

Some are for commercial products that may or may not benefit the VFP user but they do not merit inclusion in an encyclopedia. Selling your wares is fine and well but does not belong here and it contradicts Wikipedia policy. Discuss before cleanup and removal. Alexf(t/c) 22:13, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I reverted the edit that removed the link to portalfox.com, and here's why: In the field of software development in general, and Microsoft development tools in particular, English is the authoritative language of discourse regardless of the language of particular developers. In that sense, there is no clear delineation between English and Spanish in communications between developers, and in the information search by developers. Consider the reverse: what if Spanish language Wikipedia limited itself to Spanish-only links for its technical topics? I don't know if this is specifically the case, but I can tell you that this would greatly diminish the value of Spanish Wikipedia. Moreover it should be acknowledged that portalfox.com is indeed a deep and wonderful resource for Visual FoxPro developers, and I respectfully request that its inclusion in the Visual FoxPro topic of English Wikipedia be maintained. User:StevenBlack

PortalFox link is repeated (see 3rd link: "Board..."). Has been there for a long while. Why repeat? Alexf(t/c) 19:42, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Not sure if we've yet seen a encyclopedic reason to keep so many external links. That the current publisher of the product(Microsoft) is ceasing to be a source of information regarding it might be a POV, but it could be included in the article if verifiable sources make the same claim Cander0000 06:51, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
I was puzzled by the removal of all the external links, leaving only Microsoft's relatively slim pickings. Clearly the person who removed them, possibly for "encyclopedic" reasons, nonetheless isn't particularly qualified to be editing this specific article. Microsoft has NEVER been a particularly useful resource for VFP developers. The vast resources provided by the VFP community to fill the gap is, I would think, ample testament to that. StevenBlack 14:28, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
The problem is that the EL section is not to index all available information about a particular topic, but rather related information about what is included in the article. It should be the starting point to find in-depth information However, ELs a very tricky issue. The sites should be genuinely useful and not be there just to promote the article. For sites of the manufacturer or distributor, if the product got an article in Wikipedia, the sites can concluded to be notable enough and does not need to piggyback on the article for promotion. As such, official sites are a safe bet for inclusion. (Even for official site, the number of articles should be kept as small as possible).
For the rest, how should they be evaluated? Therein lies the problem. I have tried to tame the links by keeping only once type of site. For example, if one user community and forum is linked, I removed others. Though I kept the link that appeared first, it is not because I am biased for the site but rather I am not knowledgeable enough to decide whether some other site is more important. If there is some better site, please update. But not add one more unless there is a very concrete and irrefutable reason. See WP:EL for more information. --soum talk 14:56, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Please do not remove those links. Currently we have only two robust forums: UniversalThread and Foxite. Both of them are very important to the VFP Community, so there is no reason to show favouritism towards any of them. As you say, you are not knowledgeable enough, who is, but the community? I've seen WP:EL, and yes, those links qualifies to section "normally to be avoided", but we have abnormal situation, when product is supported by the community, not by manufacturer, so there is the reason to keep article up to date with external links. There are too many Microsoft links anyway. Main Visual FoxPro Microsoft page would do, since you can find there links to other VFP related pages on MS. --23 April 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.76.107.197 (talk) 15:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
You wanna go against policy, I suggest you get consensus to change the policy first. Take up the issue whether forums make good Els at the policy level at WT:EL. As long as the policy says forums are not suitable external links, they cannot be added. --soum talk 15:33, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Actually, the policy says normally to be avoided. So, policy says this link shouldn't be there: it doesn't say it can't. I'm going to re-add it and start a new section to discuss it at the bottom, and we can see if the stronger case can be made for putting it/them in or leaving them out.--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 16:45, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Advertising comments on VFPConversion.com moved

Notes and links added by ElWhitney have been moved to Talk page pending review. Sorry Ellen, but I do think that the comments and links constitute a commercial for EPS and therefore do not belong in Wikipedia but in other sites like blogs or even the Fox Wiki where it is acceptable. The subject is open for discussion here. The removed comments and links are transcribed below. (see Wikipedia rules on self-promotion) Alexf(t/c) 01:14, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

-- start of removed comments and links --
To help developers move their VFP code to .NET, several prominent members of the VFP development community created a portal called VFPConversion.com. VFPConversion also offers a free tool called VFP2Net(ProjectAnalysis) to help developers analyze and plan their conversion projects.

-- end of removed comments and links --

Programming language

FoxPro is a programming language, why is the article not using the programming language template, as used in Lisp (programming language), Fortran, and COBOL? WooyiTalk to me? 16:29, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Excellent question. I'm not sure, though, whether VFP is really a language like Lisp. xBase should have that template, though....--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 17:29, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Email List worth mention

One of the most grass-roots VFP discussion groups that still exists is the Profox Mailing list, hosted by Ed Leafe. This should be posted in the External links section:

http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox

I have no affiliation with this list, other than being a former subscriber when I was more involved in VFP development. Dkalweit (talk) 15:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

No problems here as it is a good and valid resource. -- Alexf(Talk/Contribs) 17:17, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
My only problem is, where do we draw the line? I'd almost rather pull all the exlinks except the main MS one...--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 17:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Valid question. I draw the line on spam. In the case of a software product like this, I tend to be more lenient with support boards as they are a valid resource to learn and ask questions about the software itself, as long as they are free of charge. One of the ones mentioned requires a user login, but it is free for basic usage, so I see it as valid. YMMV. If you have a particular issue with any of the links we can discuss it here and have editors chime in. Cheers! -- Alexf(Talk/Contribs) 17:32, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
No, no particular objections, short of WP:NOT in general.--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 17:36, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Microsoft's links for VFP are useless, as has been mentioned before. The product is as good as dead MS development-wise('supported' until 2015). I personally prefer to do the reader a service of providing resources for them related to the article, in the appropriate external links/see also sort of sections(not inline). Dkalweit (talk) 22:12, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Not exactly. Microsoft's VFP Forum works fine. Full disclosure: I am a moderator there. It is free and owned by Microsoft. It is frequented by experienced users, by MVPs (I am one) and by MS employees (I am not one of them). -- Alexf(Talk/Contribs) 22:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. I hadn't seen the VFP forums at MS's site until you posted that link. I mostly used Universal Thread, Profox, Foxwiki, and google searches to try to find answers to my VFP woes(rarely finding a suitable answer on any, as none existed for my problems). Thanks. Dkalweit (talk) 22:43, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Request for more details and rewrite

For those who maintain this article, may I request mentioning some actual VFP features, features by version/timeline and development overview? The current article doesn't help much for those who aren't familiar at all with VFP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xpclient (talk • contribs) 21:03, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

The problem with mentioning more actual VFP features is that the Wikipedia article starts to look like marketing material, or an advertisement. The article as it stands today does not go over the top with lists of features. What may be better is to rewrite the article using a programming language template like the entry for c++ and Smalltalk. RyanNerd (talk) 21:52, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Still I feel it can be improved by experts in VFP. The only meaningful sections are the Intro and "Recent history" ones and the history section contains a long direct quote. What I'd like to see is something similar to the Visual Basic or ASP.NET articles with more useful info, rather than mere version, codename info and code samples. - xpclient talk 03:21, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Hear-hear. StevenBlack (talk) 04:14, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

the best way for newbies to get a sense of foxpro is the applications. that's what i want to see. could someone put some links to examples of apps based upon foxpro? Retroguy90 (talk) 01:43, 11 April 2008 (UTC)retroguy90

retroguy90 I suggest the current version of The Master Genealogist which is written in VFP9 be listed as a popular example. Gioto (talk) 03:16, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

FOLLOW UP - i found out that MYOB, the dominant small business accounting software in Australasia, is written in foxpro.--Retroguy90 (talk) 00:12, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree that this should be put in a separate section (I myself have written a number of applications using VFP), but there is already a complaint that too many external links already exist, so any entries for the applications written in Visual FoxPro would need to have an internal article written up for them (or no link) -- entries in Wikipedia for any applications created using VFP would need to avoid being written like an advertisement. RyanNerd (talk) 21:59, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

There are several links to support resources in the external links section, and there are questions about at least one of them, per WP:EL. I want to come to a consensus about all of them here, and then make an in-or-out decision, rather than picking or choosing.

  • http://fox.wikis.com/ -- Fox wiki. Info on history and features of product. Also written in VFP. Free.
  • http://www.universalthread.com/ -- Primarily Fox support board, but with other sections (VB, SQL Server, Crystal Reports). Forums, monthly-ish magazine, event and speaker listings, original reporting on events. Free membership, premium features available.
  • http://leafe.com/profox/faq -- ProFox email list -- primary mailing list for Fox community. Free: open searchable archives available.
  • http://www.foxite.com/ -- forums, blogs, articles. Free

As far as I can tell, these all fall pretty much in the same place as related to WP:EL, but you might be able to make stronger cases for keeping some than others. Thoughts?

I think they should stay in: they're the main VFP support resources, and 5 links is hardly going to swamp the article.--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 16:53, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

"5 links is hardly going to swamp the article" is not a reason enough. Its in the same lines as WP:NOHARM. Links are to be decided on the basis of their usefulness, nothing else at all.
As per WP:EL, such links are to be normally avoided. True, that doesn't mean there is a blanked ban on such sites, but it does mean that the article must have a genuine need for linking to the sites. What super-normal need does the article have to deserve the out-of-the-ordinary handling? --soum talk 17:03, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
One of the strongest things about Fox has been its community -- for example, the first Microsoft MVPs were drawn from a list of posters on a Fox support board. Take away the references to the community, and you take away much of what makes it notable.--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 17:12, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, but thats a reasoning devoid of anything of substance. What makes the VFP community any different from, say, .NET Framework community. Or C++ community? Or web developers community? Or any other professional community in general? --soum talk 17:19, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Much as it pains me, I agree with Sarek. User Soumyasch, you are outside your area of knowledge here. There is ample evidence that the VFP community is vital to Visual Foxpro including this reference: http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=63 wherein:

Outside the Windows world, there are examples of the community finding ways to keep older Microsoft products concurrent.

The “SednaX”/VFPX project in the Visual FoxPro world is one prominent example. “Sedna” is the code name for a set of technologies due out from Microsoft in 2007 that will make Visual FoxPro 9.0 interoperable with application components created by using Visual Studio 2005, the .NET Framework 2.0, Office 2007 and SQL Server 2005.

The Visual FoxPro community has been unique within Microsoft, on a number of levels, for quite some time. StevenBlack (talk) 18:40, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Sarek and StevenBlack. The FoxPro community is very important and has been instrumental in keeping Microsoft developing and evolving the product for many years. It is still very supportive of it, even after Microsoft decided not to produce a new version 10 in April 2007. -- Alexf42 00:59, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
It sounds like what would be appropriate is to have a 'Community' section discussing how prominent such has been, including mention of the newer open source projects, etc. This would be more valuable to coverage of the topic than a list-o-links. Cander0000 (talk) 05:29, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. -- Alexf42 11:52, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Alex, do you have time to take this on?--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 15:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Not much but maybe we can discuss here what should be in the section and what kinds of RS are acceptable and needed. Section comments opened below... -- Alexf42 16:51, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Please ensure any external links comply with WP:EL I've removed 2 that, while they certainly might be useful toFoxPro users, they don't add very much to a general audiences understanding of FoxPro. Namely, avoid sites that require registration (Wikipedia:EL#Sites_requiring_registration), (i.e. 'Foxite.com') and 'links that are only indirectly linked to the article subject' (i.e. 'UniversalThread.com') Hope that helps! Cander0000 (talk) 08:26, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Community

An editor proposed we create this section on the article. I think it is a good idea.

I want to discuss what should be there before we start. I think we should talk about:

  • origins/history
  • importance of the community to the product
  • importance to MS to the MVP program

What kinds of reliable sources are acceptable in this instance? i.e. there are lots of info in the Fox wiki, but am not sure if anything would be readily acceptable as it is a Wiki, therefore editable. Old Compuserve files are not accessible anymore. Quotes/mentions from other boards like the UniversalThread or Foxite may not be acceptable either as they are community board with obvious POV in many cases. Opinions? Ideas? -- Alexf42 16:52, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I was trying to add ActiveVFP (VFP web apps) and MTmyVFP (desktop VFP multi-threading) to the external links of the Wikipedia entry for Visual Foxpro. This seemed totally reasonable since VFPX (also a codeplex project) is also listed there. To my amazement, they keep getting deleted!! After looking in the history for the page, the reason given is: "rm extra Codeplex links. One is all that's needed to the project. The rest is advertisement.)" This doesn’t make a lot of sense. There is a link to VFPX but not Codeplex itself. The two links I am trying to add are completely separate open source projects that add significant capability to Visual Foxpro and should be made available to the community (just as VFPX is). These projects are totally free, totally open source and based entirely on contributions from the community and Microsoft(Calvin Hsia). There are no advertisements for products or services. These projects are entirely for the benefit of the community. I contributed them because I don't want anyone to belittle VFP by saying it doesn't do web and it doesn't do multi-threading. These are important features that developers need to know about!

I understand the explanation now. For the record, I received and email from User talk:72.196.251.129 explaining the reasons behind his edits/addition of Codeplex links. I understand the, now and I agree. I also mentioned the issues with edit warring and the 3RR rule. If the explanation was forthcoming after the first revert, then we could have avoided the issue entirely. Apologies for the misunderstanding but I must follow the rules. Welcome to the project and I see now you have created an account. Feel free to ask any questions in my Talk page if needed and please remember to sign your posts in Talk pages with four tildes at the end. Thank you. -- Alexf42 16:52, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
I think the issue covered at WP:EL that applies here is not whether the links are advertising or not, but whether they provide information that can't be incorporated into the article, while providing further knowledge on the article topic. The VFPX link is relevant because even Microsoft has stated that this is where further work on the product will take place. The other add-ons/components/. What source is there that these two are more or less relevant than any other VFP add-on product? Are add-ons even common/relevant to the Visual FoxPro product/community? Perhaps the first step is to list them at DMOZ. Good fun! Cander0000 (talk) 20:32, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Visual_FoxPro/Archive_1&oldid=522460660"