I have edited this page quite dramatically (only the original first paragraph remains) in an attempt to make the entry both more informative and more neutral. If people feel there are still specifically non-neutral aspects to the page, please discuss them here.
I agree that the article is now neutral and have removed the POV check accordingly. However, the article could use a fair amount of cleanup. -- ShinmaWa(talk) 21:05, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
I added the Current Status section, mentioning briefly the FuseNG branch and the lack of current development, but I wonder at what point of death will the article need to be revamped in order to dissuade developers from picking Fusebox up as a new development practice. Perhaps the opening paragraphs should note the current status. --MrNate (talk) 18:09, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
What if we have a section on the downward spiral of Fusebox, how the change from CFML to XML change was not loved by everyone, and then the change to OO made Fusebox too similar to other OO frameworks, but without leaving the XML framework far enough behind. --MrNate (talk) 18:14, 9 April 2010 (UTC)