ColdFusion 8 feature survey

If you have not yet seen this, check it out. Not that this is an official Adobe survey, but if there's a huge developer call for some specific features, then it may have an effect. It has in the past: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=354942405396 Michael Dinowitz President: House of Fusion     http://www.houseoffusion.com Publisher: Fusion Authority     http://www.fusionauthority.com Adobe Community Expert

That a pretty good survey even though I don't know what some of the items are. I am sure over at Sean Corfield's blog there was a lot of other abilities mentioned (when will we finally get a cfimage tag?!) I wonder if the CF team will read those... And yes.. I am working on CFC refactoring and introspection, thank you very much. MD On 7/27/06, Michael Dinowitz <mdinowit@houseoffusion.com> wrote:

On Jul 27, 2006, at 3:03 PM, Mark Drew wrote: > That a pretty good survey even though I don't know what some of the   > items are. FYI the "Mustang support" option I'm guessing is related to Java 1.6   subbed Mustang.  I *hope* this would also include full support for   Java 1.5? -- Damien McKenna - Web Developer - dmckenna@thelimucompany.com The Limu Company - http://www.thelimucompany.com/ - 407-804-1014 #include <stdjoke.h>

Michael Dinowitz wrote: > If you have not yet seen this, check it out. Not that this is an official Adobe survey, but if there's a huge developer call for some specific features, then it may have an effect. It has in the past: > http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=354942405396 I filled it out.  There are quite a few things on there that are already very easy to do with CF. Asking Adobe to build in image manipulation support is kind of silly since it's SO easy to do in a variety of ways, many of which are absolutely free and all of which are pretty easy to manage.  Problem is, of course, that you can't use them in shared environments where createObject() is disabled of course, but still.  Something like that would seem to be really low priority for Adobe. But many of the features on there are definately good ideas and couldn't easily be handled by third party solutions. I'll be curious to see the results, I hope they are published. rick

Hey Adobe, how about integrating updater one and updater 2? Thanks

Isn't that what CF 7.0.2 does? On 7/27/06, loathe <loathe@speakeasy.net> wrote: > Hey Adobe, how about integrating updater one and updater 2? > > Thanks > -- =========================================================================== Raymond Camden, Vice President of Technology for roundpeg Email    : jedimaster@roundpeg.com Blog     : ray.camdenfamily.com AOL IM   : cfjedimaster "My ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is." - Yoda

That's what I thought too... Raymond Camden wrote: > Isn't that what CF 7.0.2 does? > > On 7/27/06, loathe <loathe@speakeasy.net> wrote: >> Hey Adobe, how about integrating updater one and updater 2?

> If you have not yet seen this, check it out. Not that this is an > official Adobe survey, but if there's a huge developer call for some > specific features, then it may have an effect. It has in the past: > http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=354942405396 Hey Michael. That's a survey by me actually. :) I'll be posting the results on August 11th; it's an aggregation of things people have blogged about. It's high level, so when you see "BEtter XYZ..." - that means whatever you want it to mean. But it's more to capture people's perceptions, vs very low level specifics. Cheers! - Tariq (http://www.dopejam.com)

On 7/31/06, Tariq Ahmed <tariq@dopejam.com> wrote: This is perhaps a lame self-plug, but I spent a lot of time coming up with a comprehensive list of features with explanatory text for each that I'd like to see in Scorpio. Perhaps some of these items will help people make a better decision as to what they do and don't want in the next release: http://www.cbetta.com/blog/index.cfm/2006/7/31/a-new-week-a-new-coldfusion-8-wishlist Regards, Dave.

If it not official who's is it? "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Oriel House, 26 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DL, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com -----Original Message----- From: mdinowit@houseoffusion.com <mdinowit@houseoffusion.com> To: CF-Talk <cf-talk@houseoffusion.com> Sent: Thu Jul 27 19:53:14 2006 Subject: CF 8 feature survey If you have not yet seen this, check it out. Not that this is an official Adobe survey, but if there's a huge developer call for some specific features, then it may have an effect. It has in the past: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=354942405396 Michael Dinowitz President: House of Fusion     http://www.houseoffusion.com Publisher: Fusion Authority     http://www.fusionauthority.com Adobe Community Expert

I thought ColdFusion introspects now? According to the CFC Explorer it does.. LOL "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Oriel House, 26 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DL, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com -----Original Message----- From: Mark Drew <mark.drew@gmail.com> To: CF-Talk <cf-talk@houseoffusion.com> Sent: Thu Jul 27 20:03:35 2006 Subject: Re: CF 8 feature survey That a pretty good survey even though I don't know what some of the items are. I am sure over at Sean Corfield's blog there was a lot of other abilities mentioned (when will we finally get a cfimage tag?!) I wonder if the CF team will read those... And yes.. I am working on CFC refactoring and introspection, thank you very much. MD On 7/27/06, Michael Dinowitz <mdinowit@houseoffusion.com> wrote: > If you have not yet seen this, check it out. Not that this is an official Adobe survey, but if there's a huge developer call for some specific features, then it may have an effect. It has in the past:

Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) wrote: > I thought ColdFusion introspects now? According to the CFC Explorer it > does.. The IDE doesn't.

Yes, the feature being asked for is automatic CFC introspection within CFEclipse. On 7/27/06, Rick Root <rick.root@webworksllc.com> wrote:

And yes, Mark Drew and company are working on this feature... Cutter __________ http://blog.cutterscrossing.com Brian Kotek wrote:

> And yes, Mark Drew and company are working on this feature... \o/ Introspection and refactoring support are about all I miss in CFEclipse and CFML over Idea and Java. -- Tom Chiverton **************************************************** This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP. Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at St James's Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF.  A list of members is available for inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a partner in relation to Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP. Regulated by the Law Society. CONFIDENTIALITY This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be confidential or legally privileged.  If you are not the addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform any person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents.  If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008. For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com.

I think you were supposed to type that in the little text box at the bottom of the survey.  :> ~Brad Hey Adobe, how about integrating updater one and updater 2? Thanks

Already done, and on the download page for the updater. Just making sure it gets out there.

Yep Isn't that what CF 7.0.2 does? On 7/27/06, loathe <loathe@speakeasy.net> wrote: > Hey Adobe, how about integrating updater one and updater 2? > > Thanks > -- ======================================================================== === Raymond Camden, Vice President of Technology for roundpeg Email    : jedimaster@roundpeg.com Blog     : ray.camdenfamily.com AOL IM   : cfjedimaster "My ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is." - Yoda

Nope.

To be a little more... verbose. You have to install 7.0.1 before you install 7.0.2 or you get an annoying error about it not being able to find the CFIDE directory. Terrence Ryan Senior Systems Programmer Wharton Computing and Information Technology    E-mail:    tpryan@wharton.upenn.edu Nope.

Yep :P

You mean you have to install Updater 2 *AFTER* Updater 1. I thought you meant integrating updater 1 and 2 into the base CF install, which they have done.  When you do a clean install, it includes updaters 1 and 2. Rick

Here's what I'm saying. If you do a clean CF 7 install (my disk is just 7 no updates) you have to download and install both the updaters.  It would be a lot easier if I could download the one updater and install it and get the benefits of both.

On Jul 27, 2006, at 4:41 PM, loathe wrote: > If you do a clean CF 7 install (my disk is just 7 no updates) you   > have to > download and install both the updaters.  It would be a lot easier   > if I could > download the one updater and install it and get the benefits of both. It *really* irks me when *any* software is like that.  When you do a   fresh download it should be bundled with all of the updates publicly   available to that point, there's no excuse other than corporate   laziness to do otherwise. A built-in updater in the admin interface would also be nice, you   load a page, it tells you what is available and offers to download &   install it for you. -- Damien McKenna - Web Developer - dmckenna@thelimucompany.com The Limu Company - http://www.thelimucompany.com/ - 407-804-1014 #include <stdjoke.h>

I'm saying if Fireworks and Windows can tell me when it's time to update, how hard could it be to work that into what is most likely an always on service on some server somewhere? Now, I should be able to disable auto updates easily, as I know I have a ton of servers that don't have web connections.

Problem is, of course, that you can't use them in shared environments where createObject() is disabled of course, but still.  Something like that would seem to be really low priority for Adobe. Maybe that should be the focus.  Someway that these types of features could be accessed with relative safety from shared environments. -------------- Ian Skinner Web Programmer BloodSource www.BloodSource.org Sacramento, CA --------- | 1 |   | ---------  Binary Soduko |   |   | --------- "C code. C code run. Run code run. Please!" - Cynthia Dunning Confidentiality Notice:  This message including any attachments is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete any copies of this message.

Or enhance the sandbox security to let the CFAdministrator allow only certain classes, by the full class names you'd use in the createObject call (e.g., allow "com.companyname.class1", "org.apache.xerces", etc). On 7/27/06, Ian Skinner <ian.skinner@bloodsource.org> wrote: > Problem is, of course, that you can't use them in shared environments where > createObject() is disabled of course, but still.  Something like that would seem to be really low priority for Adobe. > > > Maybe that should be the focus.  Someway that these types of features could be accessed with relative safety from shared environments. >

> It *really* irks me when *any* software is like that.  When > you do a fresh download it should be bundled with all of the > updates publicly available to that point, there's no excuse > other than corporate laziness to do otherwise. s/corporate laziness/limited QA resources I would much rather have a patch and update process that I know will work for certain, than a new installer that I don't know will work. I've run into this problem often enough. Every time they build a new installer, it has to be thoroughly tested. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta, Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location. Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information!

That's true.  With most of my government clients we have to wait for about a year before we can use updaters generally.  That's about how long it takes it to make it through the change control board and the security people. It's a big PITA

I would like to see some better email debugging.   At the moment there's none.  You fill out a form, click submit, then wait .. and wait .. and wait .. and eventually conclude that your email isnt going to arrive. Then with nothing to go on except the assumption that your email didnt work, you try to debug what might be the problem.   THen try again .. and wait . and wait . and wait . and wait. In  a shared environment you dont even get to see the failed emails cos they are in a system level folder.  Try to ask the  sysadmin to pick out yours and they are confronted with a undelivr folder with who knows how many emails in there and they are asked to scan through them all for you.   If they feel like it. I reckon it should be possible for the CFMAIL tag to produce far better error reporting than just  ** *NOTHING ** And Peter TIlbrook came up with a great idea today - why cant the Undelivr folder be in the shared web space somewhere  - each site owner can have their own maybe a "failto="" kind of parameter in the CFMAIL tag. so the failed emails will be where we can all get at them and have a look at what the problem is. It's got to be better than "send an email and see if it works, if it doesnt  try something else  and see if that works " Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month

Can't this particular issue be resolved if you use the existing "failto" attribute of CFMAIL? As this would route failed mail to a specific email address instead of the Undelivr folder. Granted it's sub optimal, in that you have to look someplace else for the messages. Terrence Ryan Senior Systems Programmer Wharton Computing and Information Technology    E-mail:    tpryan@wharton.upenn.edu I would like to see some better email debugging.   At the moment there's none.  You fill out a form, click submit, then wait .. and wait .. and wait .. and eventually conclude that your email isnt going to arrive. Then with nothing to go on except the assumption that your email didnt work, you try to debug what might be the problem.   THen try again .. and wait . and wait . and wait . and wait. In  a shared environment you dont even get to see the failed emails cos they are in a system level folder.  Try to ask the  sysadmin to pick out yours and they are confronted with a undelivr folder with who knows how many emails in there and they are asked to scan through them all for you.   If they feel like it. I reckon it should be possible for the CFMAIL tag to produce far better error reporting than just  ** *NOTHING ** And Peter TIlbrook came up with a great idea today - why cant the Undelivr folder be in the shared web space somewhere  - each site owner can have their own maybe a "failto="" kind of parameter in the CFMAIL tag. so the failed emails will be where we can all get at them and have a look at what the problem is. It's got to be better than "send an email and see if it works, if it doesnt  try something else  and see if that works " Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month

Ryan, Terrence wrote: > Can't this particular issue be resolved if you use the existing "failto" > attribute of CFMAIL? > No, failto only works if the email is accepted by the local SMTP server.   If the mail doesn't get accepted by the SMTP server, it just goes into coldfusion's undelivr folder. Rick

No. the issue with CFMAIL is that if you have a syntax error in just about any other place in ColdFusion, it throws an error and you can deal with it.   IF you have a syntax error in the content of a CFMAIL message, nothing happens.    Since you dont usually get to see your email going anyway, the only way you know there was a problem with your CFMAIL is that after 20 minutes or half an hour you haven't got your test message yet. IF you have an error in the attributes of the cfmail tag, or if you have a server name missing for example or a setting wrong,  incorrect password, or a syntax error in the body of the mail message, the result is the same - nothing. But a valid email can take up to 20 minutes to be sent, go through the mail system and find its way into your MS Outlook, so you dont really know that your mail has failed until a reasonable period has elapsed and you can be sure that had an email been sent you would have received it by now. IN a shared environment you normally have no access to the Undelivr folder so you can't see if your mail failed and is sitting there. There can be any of a dozen reasons why your mail has failed, not all of which are in your code.   And there is no way to debug it.  You just have to keep trying things  until you get it working. And as I have said, some of the reasons why it doesnt work might be related to something completely out of your control.  Or it might indeed BE working but just taking its time to get to you.   For example it can take 8 hours sometimes for my posts to CFTALK to appear in my gmail box.   So every time i post my trial email from a form, do i have to wait 8 hours before I conclude that it's not going to work? Thats why I think ColdFusion ought to offer a better degree of debugging.     Not everyone works in a controlled local environment all the time.    This week i've had a terrible time trying to figure out why three of my clients would have customer order forms that dont send emails to them as required.   Was there a code problem suddenly introduced?   Was a system setting different ?   was there a problem with the mail server?    It took ages.  And even then when the emails suddenly started working again - why?  was it something i fixed?  or was the whole problem something beyond our system that went away? It's all far to hit and miss for my liking.  I think the CFMAIL part of coldfusion is the worst part of the whole language/server/application. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month On 7/29/06, Ryan, Terrence <tpryan@wharton.upenn.edu> wrote:

Mike Kear wrote: > > In  a shared environment you dont even get to see the failed emails > cos they are in a system level folder.  Try to ask the  sysadmin to > pick out yours and they are confronted with a undelivr folder with who > knows how many emails in there and they are asked to scan through them > all for you.   If they feel like it. Any decent host has a scheduled task to move the message in the undelivered folder to some place accessible by the customer. > I reckon it should be possible for the CFMAIL tag to produce far > better error reporting than just  ** *NOTHING ** Sure it is. Just disable spooling and you will get the error right in the page. Jochem

> If you do a clean CF 7 install (my disk is just 7 no updates) > you have to download and install both the updaters.  It would > be a lot easier if I could download the one updater and > install it and get the benefits of both. They do provide a 7.0.2 installer, for people who haven't installed 7 at all yet. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta, Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location. Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information!

I can't use it with most of my clients, just the "approved" disk. Also, who wants to DL 300+ megs of crap when you only need 100+ megs of crap?

> Also, who wants to DL 300+ megs of crap when you only need 100+ megs of > crap? Dung beetles? Bryan Stevenson B.Comm. VP & Director of E-Commerce Development Electric Edge Systems Group Inc. phone: 250.480.0642 fax: 250.480.1264 cell: 250.920.8830 e-mail: bryan@electricedgesystems.com web: www.electricedgesystems.com

So, if I upgrade a server from CFMX 6.1 I will be safe applying only 7.02 ? Thanks Victor On 7/27/06, Dave Watts <dwatts@figleaf.com> wrote:

+1 Something like Windows Update or the Adobe Software Updaters would be awesome. M!ke On Jul 27, 2006, at 4:41 PM, loathe wrote: > If you do a clean CF 7 install (my disk is just 7 no updates) you have > to download and install both the updaters.  It would be a lot easier > if I could download the one updater and install it and get the > benefits of both. It *really* irks me when *any* software is like that.  When you do a fresh download it should be bundled with all of the updates publicly available to that point, there's no excuse other than corporate laziness to do otherwise. A built-in updater in the admin interface would also be nice, you load a page, it tells you what is available and offers to download & install it for you.

Ugh.  I _HATE_ Adobe's software updaters. I'm learning PHP in preparation for the day that Adobe drives me over the edge.  Ah, how I yearn for the Allaire days... On 7/27/06, Dawson, Michael <md40@evansville.edu> wrote: