ACF roadmap

Here’s where ACF appears to be headed:

Multi-cloud made easy
True cloud licensing
Centralized cloud cluster monitoring and logging
Better containerization and CI/CD support and config
Serverless app support
Easy coding of cloud APIs with less code
Microservices support
Way smaller runtime images
Full JavaScript compatibility for CFScript

1 Like

Interesting list.

  • Multi-cloud made easy - I’m not sure what this one means…
  • True cloud licensing - This would be great for Adobe users, but a non-issue for Lucee!
  • Centralized cloud cluster monitoring and logging - This seems like something already covered by existing services such as Sentry and Logstash but it be interesting to see what they come up with.
  • Better containerization and CI/CD support and config - Just moving to the Ortus CommandBox Docker containers (which support Lucee and ACF) will already give you a much better experience there.
  • Serverless app support - Lucee already has this in the form of Fuseless. I’d love to see Adobe make strides, but that is going to be a huge architectural change for them.
  • Easy coding of cloud APIs with less code - Whatever the heck that means…
  • Microservices support - Again, a marketing buzzword. The way they can “support microservies” is with a smaller runtime and scalable licensing-- not only listed above already, but things Lucee is already doing.
  • Way smaller runtime images - Yes, please. Lucee is better, but it’s still hard to fit a Lucee container with the JVM in under a Gig. 750MB if you really try. Lucee 5 actually made this wose with OSGI as jars are duplicated all over the hard drive.
  • Full JavaScript compatibility for CFScript - Ironically, the example given in the powerpoint is something Lucee has already solved better as far as better tag-in-script support but I don’t see why we need full JS compat just for that.

Good to see Adobe taking cloud seriously, but I hope they focus on making the funtime smaller and modular and fixing things like licensing instead of reinventing any wheels that are already solved.


I listened to the podcast and another thing they mentioned is coming up with a method to propagate a server configuration to multiple servers (cfconfig). You guys should get in contact with them and see if you can work together on some of these problems you’ve already solved for them.

@Daemach Oh trust me, I have. I spoke to Immanuel from the Adobe team at length during the last CF Summit but it boils down to the fact that the CFConfig CLI is a CommandBox module and Adobe doesn’t want to have to use Lucee! Funny, I know. I told them they were welcome to help modify the CFConfig service layer (that powers the CLI) to be ACF compat as it uses a few Lucee specific features right now but I don’t think they were interested. They’d rather reinvent a wheel. This is why every Adobe release is annoying when they spent a lot of their time reinventing solutions to problems that are already solved, and quite well, by existing libs. CF REST was another example of this.


Perhaps “true cloud licensing” licensing involves charging you for the number of business customers you interact with using your platform?

Does anything on the roadmap matter if there is any truth to these claims?

YOU are the only user of CF and your customers are using your own application which you use CF to serve over the web. At first, I also thought this was all a misunderstanding. I requested a meeting with CF Product Manager, Rakshith Naresh, hoping he would clarify the situation with Adobe sales people and explain to them how CF is used in a SaaS environment. But Abhishek from Account Management jumped on the call and explained their position. Any SaaS company serving other businesses is in breach of their perpetual license term, specifically 2.6.4 Prohibited Use clause. They are saying SaaS companies act as a “Service Bureau”. Abhishek try to reason with me explaining IF we had on-premise software and installed our software on each customer site instead of serving it over the web, each customer would have to buy Adobe CF. Therefore because we are serving our application over the web to multiple businesses instead of having them install Adobe CF on customer environment, Adobe is losing potential revenues. Hence the custom special agreement which they can charge whatever they want based on a secret algorithm they can’t share with you.

1 Like

Yeah, Adobe is bloody insane with their Saas licensing push, which no doubt affects nearly every user of ACF who writes an app used by “other people”. If they keep that up, they won’t have any users left, because everyone will move to Lucee or another language entirely. I just hope it’s not a desperate attempt to make money if CF isn’t doing well as an Adobe product. (For everyone’s sake, it benefits the greater CF company when Adobe CF is doing well)

I used ACF Standard for years. I remember when Microsoft announced ASP and that it would be included in IIS.

I attempted to use it after it’s first release and found it buggy and wordy.

I believe that it was a major contributor to the loss of the ACF Customer Base. Free vs $$$.

Adobe has problems with all of their licensing models and has been changing a lot of them.

After using Lucee for the past two months, I really don’t see any reason to go back.

Does this hurt ACF? How does the existence of ACF benefit Lucee, and is Lucee not taking customers away from ACF?

Just curious

ACF benefits from Lucee and vice versa. Both benefit from an active development community.

A lot of big customers want a support contract which is what ACF brings to the table

Support contracts are only as good as the support they offer.

If anyone has tried to contact Adobe support in the last decade, they maybe disappointed.

Adobe is going after Fords marriage to AWS cloud services to become the “cloud car” provider by 2030. Since Adobe isn’t targeting Ford itself, its targeting all the VARS with richer sets of APIS that do not require you to hire a complete dev team and invest hundreds of thousands of dollars to get results.

In short, I think Adobe along with half of their offerings are going in the very wrong direction, as 40 percent of its revenue still is in the Government sector.