Home of the ColdFusion Community
|
Mailing Lists
|
Home /
Groups /
ColdFusion Talk (CF-Talk)
ColdFusion 8 feature survey
Author: Denny Valliant
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248287
> Actually CF turned 11 this month.
HAPPY BIRTHDAY CF!!! (belatedly)
:D
Author: Dave Carabetta
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248261
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
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.
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248254
But what weight does it hold?
"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
> 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)
Author: Tariq Ahmed
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248250
> 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)
Author: dcooper
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248216
Yes, that's correct.
Damon
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248206
Jeez time flies... Doesn't seem that long ago it was 10!
"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
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Actually CF turned 11 this month.
Author: Dave Watts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248199
> -ps just be sure you download the trail and not the developer
> edition, in case that makes a difference.
It doesn't.
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!
Author: Peter Tilbrook
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248197
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Actually CF turned 11 this month.
Author: Denny Valliant
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248193
> Hi Damon,
>
> Actually my question was upgrading from CFMX 6.1 to 7.02.
> Can I just download CFMX 7.02 from the Adobe, upgrade my CFMX 6.1 server
> and
> then buy an upgrade license on line and apply it?
I'm pretty sure that's how it works. Haven't done it that way myself, but
sounds correct!
:D
-ps just be sure you download the trail and not the developer edition, in
case that makes
a difference.
Author: Victor Moore
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248183
Hi Damon,
Actually my question was upgrading from CFMX 6.1 to 7.02.
Can I just download CFMX 7.02 from the Adobe, upgrade my CFMX 6.1 server and
then buy an upgrade license on line and apply it?
Thanks
On 7/30/06, dcooper @ macromedia. com dcooper @ macromedia. com <
dcooper@macromedia.com> wrote:
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: dcooper
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248172
This is detailed in the 7.0.2 FAQ, but since many folks don't read docs
anymore.... :)
That's correct: download or buy CF7 (online or CD/box) and you'll now get the
7.0.2 full installer. CF 7.0.0 is no longer available for sale or download
(except perhaps in older box copies in stock in retail channels).
1) Folks running 7.0.1 download the 7.0.2 Updater Kit.
2) Folks doing new installs of CF7 should get the Full Kit (they're 7.0.2).
Folks who are still running CF 7.0.0 either first update to 7.0.1, then 7.0.2 OR
(in the case of non-JRun J2EE installs, for example), follow the instrutions in
the 7.0.2 Install Instructions to backup settings, undeploy, install/deploy 7.0.2
Full Kits and restire settings.
Folks, we include security fixes in these releases that are needed to protect you
and help keep your sites safe from actack.
Please let anyone you know running old versions of CF to visit the CF update page
and get current as a matter of best practice.
Damon
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Dan Plesse
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248162
Interesting! I just ran out of things to solve after the classpath runtime
issue and now maybe I could
work on this cfmail problem.
I normally can read (unofficially) all the unsent mail in the Undelivr
folder and redo everything on a shared host.
I have always done this and I have changed shared hosts a few times. I even
have hsqldb running on a shared
host! The speed level is way off the chart too. I also do work for them
installing stuff and fixing things, so they will never boot me. I told them
about the hsqldb web server running inside CF and they did not care and I
loaded it all at runtime with drivers, go figure.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248157
LOL good one - I am not poo poo-ing Mike's request! Far from it I respect
anyones drive to improve CD but...
whether you buy it or not, once ColdFusion has written the email to disk /
memory it is out of your calling threads hands. There is only a finite
number or ways you could report that a mail has failed during a thread
duration - as Mike noted username, password, and server and that is about it
(and ColdFusion does this now).
In the duration of the calling thread there is no way you could tell if an
email is going to be successful or not (if it passes the security parts
above) as what can ColdFusion do when an email is accepted to an SMTP server
for an unknown user but that server is told to try sending it 10 times in
say 1 week?! The only foolproof way is to use failto in tandom with cfpop.
Now, while I do see where improvements can be made and indeed should, like
you noted but they are more underlying JavaMail feature based (more access
to JavaMail stuff as I would love to get TLS working natively!) I also voted
for the more ways to plugin your own cfmail engine.
All I can ascertain here is a request that you can get access to the mail
undeliverable folder in a shared environment which in itself is not related
to cfmail.
N
"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
Ditto, Rick! And workarounds are usually the easiest features to implement!
You KNOW what you want, or expect, or whatnot. No need for votes, etc.
CFMAIL has had "issues" for ages, it constantly killed my server, with
CF 5 I think. It's gotten better, but I can feel Mike's frustration, there
is a certain air of the "fax modem" that's a modem but not really a fax,
if you catch my drift. I think I saw a rating scale on how well various
systems handled email, and CF was at the bottom.
But that's just basically hear-say.
I remember having to be up at 3am, just to restart CF and clean
the spool folder. Heh. 'magine? "Having" to do anything... *sigh* (sorry,
side thought about my lack of focus).
But seriously, I've seen cfmail pop up as a complaint enough that
I wouldn't try to sell it as not needing improvement. I wouldn't mind
being able to use some of the functionality that's already in javamail,
for instance (secure imap! ;o). I mean, *I* can, as I can gleam what
I need to use the java, but no neophyte could do that very easy.
It's a tough call, this feature request stuff. Sorta like voting, is the
real populace getting heard? If a tree falls in the forest, and no one
is around, does it matter? Personally, I don't use the mail part of
CF much, so I could care less, and would rather see some thing
I *DO* use or want to use get the attention, but I won't try to
downplay someone else's request to get mine in there. Not that
that's what happened, but you know, subconsciously, we want what
we want or whatever.
Plus, what is wanted is cake to do, we're not talking complicated
math here. Adobe could hire some goons for cfmail and still see
a ton of improvement/nifty options.
Personally, I would have filed Mike's request under "known issues"*,
if anything. But again, maybe just cuz I've run into trouble with it
as well. And don't buy the "once it's ""sent"", it's out of CF's hands"
theory. Sheesh. Our UI's are finally coming back, but email is stuck
in the last century?
*known as in: Adobe could get a raft of "wishes" just via the livedocs.
Heh. Man, the moon must be at a certain distance from the earth
or something, right? I wish I could think of something funny to lighten
the mood... oh, I know; What did the three legged dog say when he
walked into the saloon? WAIT FOR IT... WAIT FOR IT...
I'm looking for the man who shot my paw.
Har! Har! Har! Awesome, no?
:]enny
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Denny Valliant
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248152
Ditto, Rick! And workarounds are usually the easiest features to implement!
You KNOW what you want, or expect, or whatnot. No need for votes, etc.
CFMAIL has had "issues" for ages, it constantly killed my server, with
CF 5 I think. It's gotten better, but I can feel Mike's frustration, there
is a certain air of the "fax modem" that's a modem but not really a fax,
if you catch my drift. I think I saw a rating scale on how well various
systems handled email, and CF was at the bottom.
But that's just basically hear-say.
I remember having to be up at 3am, just to restart CF and clean
the spool folder. Heh. 'magine? "Having" to do anything... *sigh* (sorry,
side thought about my lack of focus).
But seriously, I've seen cfmail pop up as a complaint enough that
I wouldn't try to sell it as not needing improvement. I wouldn't mind
being able to use some of the functionality that's already in javamail,
for instance (secure imap! ;o). I mean, *I* can, as I can gleam what
I need to use the java, but no neophyte could do that very easy.
It's a tough call, this feature request stuff. Sorta like voting, is the
real populace getting heard? If a tree falls in the forest, and no one
is around, does it matter? Personally, I don't use the mail part of
CF much, so I could care less, and would rather see some thing
I *DO* use or want to use get the attention, but I won't try to
downplay someone else's request to get mine in there. Not that
that's what happened, but you know, subconsciously, we want what
we want or whatever.
Plus, what is wanted is cake to do, we're not talking complicated
math here. Adobe could hire some goons for cfmail and still see
a ton of improvement/nifty options.
Personally, I would have filed Mike's request under "known issues"*,
if anything. But again, maybe just cuz I've run into trouble with it
as well. And don't buy the "once it's ""sent"", it's out of CF's hands"
theory. Sheesh. Our UI's are finally coming back, but email is stuck
in the last century?
*known as in: Adobe could get a raft of "wishes" just via the livedocs.
Heh. Man, the moon must be at a certain distance from the earth
or something, right? I wish I could think of something funny to lighten
the mood... oh, I know; What did the three legged dog say when he
walked into the saloon? WAIT FOR IT... WAIT FOR IT...
I'm looking for the man who shot my paw.
Har! Har! Har! Awesome, no?
:]enny
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248144
It is more the lack of error reporting, as it does error log (in terms of
SMTP)?
Who knows, I will log a wish for anyway to keep the faith...!
"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
Regards cfmail, I would imagine the lack of error checking has something to
do with the balance between speed and usability. The more error checking it
has to do, the more it slows down.
If there was robust error checking in the context of a cfmail, people might
be complaining that cfmail was too darn slow. For years the knock on CF was
"it's too heavy, too slow" (in some circles people still think that) so at
some point I imagine the developers were leaning toward speed over
usability, and so they sacrificed error checking in cfmail content. Just a
guess.
-- Josh
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Josh Nathanson
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248143
Regards cfmail, I would imagine the lack of error checking has something to
do with the balance between speed and usability. The more error checking it
has to do, the more it slows down.
If there was robust error checking in the context of a cfmail, people might
be complaining that cfmail was too darn slow. For years the knock on CF was
"it's too heavy, too slow" (in some circles people still think that) so at
some point I imagine the developers were leaning toward speed over
usability, and so they sacrificed error checking in cfmail content. Just a
guess.
-- Josh
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248140
Indeed, and it makes you wonder why that, such a significant problem has not
been addressed in earlier editions. Must be a reason?
"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
From somewhat of an outsider's perspective on this "discussion"...
Usually the problems for which workarounds have to be developed
become features eventually.
Yes, it's true there are workarounds for the email issue, but if it's a
significant issue, as Mike is saying, then CF should be enhanced
to handle it on its own and not with workarounds.
Just some thoughts...
Rick
Yep. SIlly me. I've been coding ColdFusion for only 9 years.
I have more than 40 clients building web sites on my system. I build sites
for other clients on their systems too. In all, over the last 9 years I've
worked on self-hosted systems and shared hosting systems.
In fact I think i've worked on sites on about 6 different hosting centres.
Some mine, some were other hosting companies my clients have chosen. My
first learning experience all those years ago was with Shanje (SHUDDER!),
and lately with HostMySite, and Netspeed and others in between.
NOT ONE . .NONE have ever had any plan to allow users to get access to
undelivered emails.
As i said, i had this fantasy that last week alone I spent 6 hours trying to
track down CFMAIL problems that my clients were having in their code.
Obviously i was mistaken and was reading the paper all
that time instead. The panic emails from my clients asking for help
figuring out why their forms weren't working were figments of my
imagination.
CFMAIL is a tag that gives a lot of heartburn to some users. It was
impertinent of me to suggest that perhaps we might make CFMAIL easier
for users to code. After all, ColdFusion had that reputation years
ago that it was easy to use for neophytes, but "REAL" SERVER PROGRAMS
shed that notion really early on. And if Coldfusion is to be a
"REAL" SERVER app like .ASP or .PHP it has to be more difficult to use not
easier.
I dont know what i was thinking. Easier to use. Reduce the time
taken to develop and debug. Jeez. That would only get in the way of
the headlong rush to force ColdFusion into being a second-class imitation of
something else rather than the best in the world at what it does best -
something that the java and dotnet and php programmers would envy and whine
about to their vendors. NO! We wouldnt want that. We have to continually
compare CFMX to other solutions, instead of having THEM follow US.
For many shared hosted users it isnt all there. (not their - your
spellcheck has led you astray). You dont have experience of shared
hosting Neil so I think you should pull your head in on the subject.
There are quite a few aspects of CF sites that are different for
shared hosted environments. And access to server-level folders and
the CF Admin is one of them.
It's not essential that CFMAIL be made easier to use and debug. But it
would be of assistance to users in shared hosting environments. We
were talking about things we'd like to see in CF8. I saw a need and
said so but now i wish I hadn't. I think CF would be a little easier
and faster to develop with if debugging of that tag was improved.
And found a simple thing that could be done to make it easier to
debug. Since then you've done nothing but cry it down. I dont know
why you see it as such a threat. You wouldnt have to use it. You could
still do any debugging the old way.
Apparently you think anything that makes CFMX easier to use and debug is a
bad thing. I can only imagine you think it makes it less like java or
something if it's easier to use.
I sure wont make the mistake again of thinking it would be a good thing if
CFMX were any easier to use even in a small way.
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
> That is not what we are saying! The fact here is that you say there is
> no way to tell if an email fails - and we know there is - both at
> server level and code.
>
> What more do you need to tell that an email fails? it is all their for
you.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Rick Faircloth
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248139
From somewhat of an outsider's perspective on this "discussion"...
Usually the problems for which workarounds have to be developed
become features eventually.
Yes, it's true there are workarounds for the email issue, but if it's a
significant issue, as Mike is saying, then CF should be enhanced
to handle it on its own and not with workarounds.
Just some thoughts...
Rick
Yep. SIlly me. I've been coding ColdFusion for only 9 years.
I have more than 40 clients building web sites on my system. I build sites
for other clients on their systems too. In all, over the last 9 years I've
worked on self-hosted systems and shared hosting systems.
In fact I think i've worked on sites on about 6 different hosting centres.
Some mine, some were other hosting companies my clients have chosen. My
first learning experience all those years ago was with Shanje (SHUDDER!),
and lately with HostMySite, and Netspeed and others in between.
NOT ONE . .NONE have ever had any plan to allow users to get access to
undelivered emails.
As i said, i had this fantasy that last week alone I spent 6 hours trying to
track down CFMAIL problems that my clients were having in their code.
Obviously i was mistaken and was reading the paper all
that time instead. The panic emails from my clients asking for help
figuring out why their forms weren't working were figments of my
imagination.
CFMAIL is a tag that gives a lot of heartburn to some users. It was
impertinent of me to suggest that perhaps we might make CFMAIL easier
for users to code. After all, ColdFusion had that reputation years
ago that it was easy to use for neophytes, but "REAL" SERVER PROGRAMS
shed that notion really early on. And if Coldfusion is to be a
"REAL" SERVER app like .ASP or .PHP it has to be more difficult to use not
easier.
I dont know what i was thinking. Easier to use. Reduce the time
taken to develop and debug. Jeez. That would only get in the way of
the headlong rush to force ColdFusion into being a second-class imitation of
something else rather than the best in the world at what it does best -
something that the java and dotnet and php programmers would envy and whine
about to their vendors. NO! We wouldnt want that. We have to continually
compare CFMX to other solutions, instead of having THEM follow US.
For many shared hosted users it isnt all there. (not their - your
spellcheck has led you astray). You dont have experience of shared
hosting Neil so I think you should pull your head in on the subject.
There are quite a few aspects of CF sites that are different for
shared hosted environments. And access to server-level folders and
the CF Admin is one of them.
It's not essential that CFMAIL be made easier to use and debug. But it
would be of assistance to users in shared hosting environments. We
were talking about things we'd like to see in CF8. I saw a need and
said so but now i wish I hadn't. I think CF would be a little easier
and faster to develop with if debugging of that tag was improved.
And found a simple thing that could be done to make it easier to
debug. Since then you've done nothing but cry it down. I dont know
why you see it as such a threat. You wouldnt have to use it. You could
still do any debugging the old way.
Apparently you think anything that makes CFMX easier to use and debug is a
bad thing. I can only imagine you think it makes it less like java or
something if it's easier to use.
I sure wont make the mistake again of thinking it would be a good thing if
CFMX were any easier to use even in a small way.
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
> That is not what we are saying! The fact here is that you say there is
> no way to tell if an email fails - and we know there is - both at
> server level and code.
>
> What more do you need to tell that an email fails? it is all their for
you.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248137
Jeez no, I want real-time debugging back pronto! All for it. You will
remember what it was like for "Cold Fusion". I don't see it as a threat what
you are asking far from it they just haven't seen it as a necessary edition.
If you get it in their then cool, as Ray would say go/wish! Maybe if they
get away from adding Flex this, Flex that you might be lucky...
Maybe Jochem has the best host ever :-) the point about it being 10 years
old as that the problem exists and someone somewhere must have came up with
a solution - my only backbi
You must have got a body too long on that mail!
Maybe the solution is to get your own SMTP server and send all you mail to
that - job done email debug at your fingertips :-p
"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
Yep. SIlly me. I've been coding ColdFusion for only 9 years.
I have more than 40 clients building web sites on my system. I build
sites for other clients on their systems too. In all, over the last 9
years I've worked on self-hosted systems and shared hosting systems.
In fact I think i've worked on sites on about 6 different hosting
centres. Some mine, some were other hosting companies my clients have
chosen. My first learning experience all those years ago was with
Shanje (SHUDDER!), and lately with HostMySite, and Netspeed and others
in between.
NOT ONE . .NONE have ever had any plan to allow users to get access to
undelivered emails.
As i said, i had this fantasy that last week alone I spent 6 hours
trying to track down CFMAIL problems that my clients were having in
their code. Obviously i was mistaken and was reading the paper all
that time instead. The panic emails from my clients asking for help
figuring out why their forms weren't working were figments of my
imagination.
CFMAIL is a tag that gives a lot of heartburn to some users. It was
impertinent of me to suggest that perhaps we might make CFMAIL easier
for users to code. After all, ColdFusion had that reputation years
ago that it was easy to use for neophytes, but "REAL" SERVER PROGRAMS
shed that notion really early on. And if Coldfusion is to be a
"REAL" SERVER app like .ASP or .PHP it has to be more difficult to use
not easier.
I dont know what i was thinking. Easier to use. Reduce the time
taken to develop and debug. Jeez. That would only get in the way of
the headlong rush to force ColdFusion into being a second-class
imitation of something else rather than the best in the world at what
it does best - something that the java and dotnet and php programmers
would envy and whine about to their vendors. NO! We wouldnt want
that. We have to continually compare CFMX to other solutions, instead
of having THEM follow US.
For many shared hosted users it isnt all there. (not their - your
spellcheck has led you astray). You dont have experience of shared
hosting Neil so I think you should pull your head in on the subject.
There are quite a few aspects of CF sites that are different for
shared hosted environments. And access to server-level folders and
the CF Admin is one of them.
It's not essential that CFMAIL be made easier to use and debug. But it
would be of assistance to users in shared hosting environments. We
were talking about things we'd like to see in CF8. I saw a need and
said so but now i wish I hadn't. I think CF would be a little easier
and faster to develop with if debugging of that tag was improved.
And found a simple thing that could be done to make it easier to
debug. Since then you've done nothing but cry it down. I dont know
why you see it as such a threat. You wouldnt have to use it. You
could still do any debugging the old way.
Apparently you think anything that makes CFMX easier to use and debug
is a bad thing. I can only imagine you think it makes it less like
java or something if it's easier to use.
I sure wont make the mistake again of thinking it would be a good
thing if CFMX were any easier to use even in a small way.
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
> That is not what we are saying! The fact here is that you say there is no
> way to tell if an email fails - and we know there is - both at server
level
> and code.
>
> What more do you need to tell that an email fails? it is all their for
you.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Mike Kear
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248136
Yep. SIlly me. I've been coding ColdFusion for only 9 years.
I have more than 40 clients building web sites on my system. I build
sites for other clients on their systems too. In all, over the last 9
years I've worked on self-hosted systems and shared hosting systems.
In fact I think i've worked on sites on about 6 different hosting
centres. Some mine, some were other hosting companies my clients have
chosen. My first learning experience all those years ago was with
Shanje (SHUDDER!), and lately with HostMySite, and Netspeed and others
in between.
NOT ONE . .NONE have ever had any plan to allow users to get access to
undelivered emails.
As i said, i had this fantasy that last week alone I spent 6 hours
trying to track down CFMAIL problems that my clients were having in
their code. Obviously i was mistaken and was reading the paper all
that time instead. The panic emails from my clients asking for help
figuring out why their forms weren't working were figments of my
imagination.
CFMAIL is a tag that gives a lot of heartburn to some users. It was
impertinent of me to suggest that perhaps we might make CFMAIL easier
for users to code. After all, ColdFusion had that reputation years
ago that it was easy to use for neophytes, but "REAL" SERVER PROGRAMS
shed that notion really early on. And if Coldfusion is to be a
"REAL" SERVER app like .ASP or .PHP it has to be more difficult to use
not easier.
I dont know what i was thinking. Easier to use. Reduce the time
taken to develop and debug. Jeez. That would only get in the way of
the headlong rush to force ColdFusion into being a second-class
imitation of something else rather than the best in the world at what
it does best - something that the java and dotnet and php programmers
would envy and whine about to their vendors. NO! We wouldnt want
that. We have to continually compare CFMX to other solutions, instead
of having THEM follow US.
For many shared hosted users it isnt all there. (not their - your
spellcheck has led you astray). You dont have experience of shared
hosting Neil so I think you should pull your head in on the subject.
There are quite a few aspects of CF sites that are different for
shared hosted environments. And access to server-level folders and
the CF Admin is one of them.
It's not essential that CFMAIL be made easier to use and debug. But it
would be of assistance to users in shared hosting environments. We
were talking about things we'd like to see in CF8. I saw a need and
said so but now i wish I hadn't. I think CF would be a little easier
and faster to develop with if debugging of that tag was improved.
And found a simple thing that could be done to make it easier to
debug. Since then you've done nothing but cry it down. I dont know
why you see it as such a threat. You wouldnt have to use it. You
could still do any debugging the old way.
Apparently you think anything that makes CFMX easier to use and debug
is a bad thing. I can only imagine you think it makes it less like
java or something if it's easier to use.
I sure wont make the mistake again of thinking it would be a good
thing if CFMX were any easier to use even in a small way.
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
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Jochem van Dieten
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248134
Mike Kear wrote:
> OK then . I give up. There is nothing about any aspect of ColdFusion
> that could possibly be improved.
>
> Waste of time suggesting anything. The fact that I spend a
> significant amount of my time helping my clients work through CFMAIL
> problems is probably only fantasy on my part.
I don't know about your customers, but the ones I host get an explanation about
how to use failto and spoolenable in their welcome message and that is enough.
And for the record: I already filed an enhancement request for the failto
attribute to do pretty much what Peter Tillbrook suggested during the 6.1 beta
cycle (#50755, April 12, 2003).
> What a bunch of negative thinkers you lot are. I'm bloody glad you
> arent working on the feature list for the next version. There would be
> no new features at all.
There would be the features I needed for problems that I have not solved yet
instead of the features for things I can work around.
Jochem
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248132
That is not what we are saying! The fact here is that you say there is no
way to tell if an email fails - and we know there is - both at server level
and code.
What more do you need to tell that an email fails? it is all their for you.
ColdFusion is 10 years old and this is probably that most basic of tags.
Jochen provided a good way hosts deal with the undeliverable.
"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
OK then . I give up. There is nothing about any aspect of ColdFusion
that could possibly be improved.
Waste of time suggesting anything. The fact that I spend a
significant amount of my time helping my clients work through CFMAIL
problems is probably only fantasy on my part.
What a bunch of negative thinkers you lot are. I'm bloody glad you
arent working on the feature list for the next version. There would be
no new features at all.
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
> Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) wrote:
> > Thanks Jochen; I am not familiar with shared hosting and to be honest I
> > forgot about spooling!
>
> The only involvement I have with shared hosting is that I run one :)
Anything in the undeliverable folder gets parsed and if the programmer has
bothered to code a failto attribute in the cfmail it has a failto address in
the header and I send it there. If the programmer didn't bother about a
failto attribute I suppose he doesn't want the errors and I just delete the
failed email.
>
>
> The problem with that is exactly the opposite problem from the one Mike
has: some errors get handled twice, once in the try/catch that gets
triggered when you don't spool and once when they are in the undeliverable
folder. Some people find it very confusing they are notified twice of the
same error :)
>
> Jochem
>
>
Author: Mike Kear
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248131
OK then . I give up. There is nothing about any aspect of ColdFusion
that could possibly be improved.
Waste of time suggesting anything. The fact that I spend a
significant amount of my time helping my clients work through CFMAIL
problems is probably only fantasy on my part.
What a bunch of negative thinkers you lot are. I'm bloody glad you
arent working on the feature list for the next version. There would be
no new features at all.
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
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Jochem van Dieten
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248130
Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) wrote:
> Thanks Jochen; I am not familiar with shared hosting and to be honest I
> forgot about spooling!
The only involvement I have with shared hosting is that I run one :) Anything in
the undeliverable folder gets parsed and if the programmer has bothered to code a
failto attribute in the cfmail it has a failto address in the header and I send
it there. If the programmer didn't bother about a failto attribute I suppose he
doesn't want the errors and I just delete the failed email.
The problem with that is exactly the opposite problem from the one Mike has: some
errors get handled twice, once in the try/catch that gets triggered when you
don't spool and once when they are in the undeliverable folder. Some people find
it very confusing they are notified twice of the same error :)
Jochem
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248129
Thanks Jochen; I am not familiar with shared hosting and to be honest I
forgot about spooling!
There are also loads of other ways to tell from logs etc.
"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
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
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248128
Not at all, I think debugging is only a good thing but you have to see that
CFMAL does exactly what it should do at present - and it DOES tell you if an
email fails (both in logs and in the mail message itself moved to the
undeliv folder), but maybe not just in shared environment?
I could see that in a shared environment that you may be able to tell if an
email has failed though on an owned environment you can simply look into the
maillogs / undeliverable folder to see why an email failed. I am not
familiar with how shared environments work so maybe there is a way it can be
done? Snake etc are v.familiar with this so maybe he can input. Surely Adobe
know this and have workarounds?
Maybe you can look into using the JavaMail API to see why an email failed -
have a look to see what it available to you (assuming you have createObject
capability in that hosting)
"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
So my point remains .... I dont care which part of the system tells
me what's wrong as long as SOMETHING does.
At the moment, the only indication you have that there's something
wrong with your mail is the fact that it hasnt arrived. Or is is
that your email has actually worked ok but just not arrived yet?
One thing that could happens is Peter TIlbrook's idea - have the
Undelivr folder (or it's equivaient) configurable in the code, perhaps
in the CFMAIL tag - maybe a underliverto="" attribute. Then at least
there would be one thing you could look at to see why the email didnt
work. It doesnt cover all cases by any means but it does cover some,
and thats a step in the right direction.
I didnt mention your silly <cfmail></cfmail> example, because these
days with tag completion and code hinting I have very few of that kind
of syntax error. I'd never try to put that in a page because my IDE
wouldnt let me without warning.
Neil, you dont seem to think there is a need fo have any debugging of
CFMAIL. I'm not sure why. Perhaps you never make errors. Perhaps
you never use CFMAIL in a shared hosting environment where you have no
access to any system level folders. Perhaps you love spending 5 times
longer building a simple cfmail app than any other part of your
system. I dont know . but i think there are lots of people who find
CFMAIL a devil of a functionality to build unless it's very
stock-standard and basic.
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
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
JavaMail
> inside ColdFusion. It is not in control and should never be in control of
> this process.
>
>
>
Author: Jochem van Dieten
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248127
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
Author: Mike Kear
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248126
So my point remains .... I dont care which part of the system tells
me what's wrong as long as SOMETHING does.
At the moment, the only indication you have that there's something
wrong with your mail is the fact that it hasnt arrived. Or is is
that your email has actually worked ok but just not arrived yet?
One thing that could happens is Peter TIlbrook's idea - have the
Undelivr folder (or it's equivaient) configurable in the code, perhaps
in the CFMAIL tag - maybe a underliverto="" attribute. Then at least
there would be one thing you could look at to see why the email didnt
work. It doesnt cover all cases by any means but it does cover some,
and thats a step in the right direction.
I didnt mention your silly <cfmail></cfmail> example, because these
days with tag completion and code hinting I have very few of that kind
of syntax error. I'd never try to put that in a page because my IDE
wouldnt let me without warning.
Neil, you dont seem to think there is a need fo have any debugging of
CFMAIL. I'm not sure why. Perhaps you never make errors. Perhaps
you never use CFMAIL in a shared hosting environment where you have no
access to any system level folders. Perhaps you love spending 5 times
longer building a simple cfmail app than any other part of your
system. I dont know . but i think there are lots of people who find
CFMAIL a devil of a functionality to build unless it's very
stock-standard and basic.
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
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248125
Hmmm so, <CFMAIL></CFMAIL> doesn't fail? (no To etc). I can
understand it
not erroring if you have a bad username/passord or server name/IP as
ColdFusion is not technically in the loop at that part of the process.
ColdFusion literally just writes the email out (assuming you have correct
tag syntax) and it is the SMTP server which will say yay or nay to JavaMail
inside ColdFusion. It is not in control and should never be in control of
this process.
"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
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
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Mike Kear
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248124
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
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Munson, Jacob
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248075
> Really? Largest as in employees or in revenue? I think with
> Microsoft is
> that they literally throw money at resources - they know what they are
> doing. It may be the 3rd largest in it's sector I suppose.
Well, I tried to find where I read that, but couldn't find it. Anyway,
usually when I read articles that discuss company sizes, the are talking
about revenue. I did find a lot of articles that said that Adobe is the
3rd largest software company in the US, in revenue, but all of these
articles were quoting a 2000 Adobe press release.
--------------
This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or
exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or
use of the information contained herein (including any reliance thereon) is
STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this transmission in error, please
immediately contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether
in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you. A1.
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248040
Really? Largest as in employees or in revenue? I think with Microsoft is
that they literally throw money at resources - they know what they are
doing. It may be the 3rd largest in it's sector I suppose.
"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
> Yeah, peeps forget that Adobe/MM are not Microsoft and their
> resources are a
> piss in the ocean compared to larger software/corporate houses....
I read recently that Adobe is now the world's 3rd largest software
company, after buying Macromedia. So they have a lot more resources
than you might think. But I'd agree, they probably still pale in
comparison to Microsoft's yearly revenue...
------------
This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential
and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying,
distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including any
reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this transmission
in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the material in
its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you. A1.
Author: Munson, Jacob
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248038
> Yeah, peeps forget that Adobe/MM are not Microsoft and their
> resources are a
> piss in the ocean compared to larger software/corporate houses....
I read recently that Adobe is now the world's 3rd largest software
company, after buying Macromedia. So they have a lot more resources
than you might think. But I'd agree, they probably still pale in
comparison to Microsoft's yearly revenue...
------------
This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or
exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or
use of the information contained herein (including any reliance thereon) is
STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this transmission in error, please
immediately contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether
in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you. A1.
Author: Rick Root
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248003
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
Author: Ryan, Terrence
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#248000
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
Author: Tom Chiverton
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247995
> 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.
Author: Cutter (CFRelated)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247992
And yes, Mark Drew and company are working on this feature...
Cutter
__________
http://blog.cutterscrossing.com
Brian Kotek wrote:
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247978
Well I suppose there are ways around it by using the server="" attribute to
relay via other servers.
"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
The ability to store CFMAIL messages in the application that actually
generated them. A boon when on a shared server they keep changing email
settings for.
Author: Peter Tilbrook
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247977
The ability to store CFMAIL messages in the application that actually generated
them. A boon when on a shared server they keep changing email settings for.
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247976
Which IDE? DW? That does.
Also one thing I would like changed is that cfcatch is a really a struct :-)
"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
Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) wrote:
> I thought ColdFusion introspects now? According to the CFC Explorer it
> does..
The IDE doesn't.
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247975
Isn't that extrospection though?
"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
Yes, the feature being asked for is automatic CFC introspection within
CFEclipse.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247974
That would be the best you could hope for - the ability to read into your
own email space. I am suprised that this isn't possible.
You won't be able to get much more info that what is recorded in the txt
file itself as ColdFusion seems to work on the principle of, f it was able
to be written to the disk that was a success!
Is there no way you can create your own filename/header then surely that
way, if allowed you could just read into the spool/undlvb folder for it.
A mail process does write the error into the email file itself - so you can
get the error should you need to.
"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
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
Author: Mike Kear
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247972
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
Author: Pete Ruckelshaus
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247965
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...
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Brian Kotek
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247964
Yes, the feature being asked for is automatic CFC introspection within
CFEclipse.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Rick Root
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247961
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
Author: Rick Root
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247959
That's what I thought too...
Raymond Camden wrote:
> Isn't that what CF 7.0.2 does?
>
>
>> Hey Adobe, how about integrating updater one and updater 2?
Author: Rick Root
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247960
Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) wrote:
> I thought ColdFusion introspects now? According to the CFC Explorer it
> does..
The IDE doesn't.
Author: David
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247958
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).
> 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.
Author: Victor Moore
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247952
Thanks Dave,
I think I will take the safe path and install, 7 then 7.01 and then 7.02
/r
Victor
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Dave Watts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247950
> I can't use it with most of my clients, just the "approved" disk.
But you can install the updater? That just doesn't make sense to me, but
then again I'm not a government security guy. Couldn't you just call it an
updater, and install it anyway in that case?
> Also, who wants to DL 300+ megs of crap when you only need
> 100+ megs of crap?
Well, if you no longer need the original install CD, you have a net loss of
crap - the 7.0.2 installer is ~280MB or so, I think, while the original
installer plus the updater are somewhat larger. If you end up storing all
your installers as ISOs or raw files on disk, as I do, you end up with less
crap. But yeah, I see what you're saying.
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!
Author: Dave Watts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247949
> So, if I upgrade a server from CFMX 6.1 I will be safe
> applying only 7.02 ?
If you have the full 7.0.2 installer, as opposed to the updater, I guess so.
Honestly, I really don't know for sure, since almost all the installations I
work with use the multi-server version, which isn't upgradeable - you have
to uninstall and reinstall, or install into a new server instance, etc.
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!
Author: Victor Moore
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247947
So, if I upgrade a server from CFMX 6.1 I will be safe applying only 7.02 ?
Thanks
Victor
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247944
Yeah, peeps forget that Adobe/MM are not Microsoft and their resources are a
piss in the ocean compared to larger software/corporate houses....
"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
> 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!
Author: Bryan Stevenson
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247943
> 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
Author: loathe
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247942
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?
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Dawson, Michael
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247941
+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.
Author: Dave Watts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247940
> 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!
Author: loathe
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247939
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
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Dave Watts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247937
> 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!
Author: Ian Skinner
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247936
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.
Author: loathe
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247935
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.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Damien McKenna
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247934
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>
Author: Damien McKenna
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247933
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>
Author: loathe
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247931
Yep :P
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Ryan, Terrence
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247929
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.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: loathe
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247930
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.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: loathe
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247927
Nope.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Steve Brownlee
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247926
Yep
Isn't that what CF 7.0.2 does?
> 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
Author: Raymond Camden
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247925
Isn't that what CF 7.0.2 does?
> 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
Author: loathe
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247920
Already done, and on the download page for the updater.
Just making sure it gets out there.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Brad Wood
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247919
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
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247918
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
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
> 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:
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: loathe
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247915
Hey Adobe, how about integrating updater one and updater 2?
Thanks
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247914
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
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
Author: Rick Root
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247913
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
Author: Mark Drew
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247909
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
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Michael Dinowitz
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:46995#247908
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
|
May 24, 2012
|
Latest Fusion Authority Articles
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
