If the client is making changes to their sites then all bets are off, but it does almost guarantee that you'll have business when they screw something up.
Internally though I'd have some kind of repository set up, just to house the deployed code, so you can easily fix it when they break it. -----Original Message----- From: Justin Scott [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, January 22, 2010 11:54 AM To: cf-community Subject: RE: Help me not hate Dreamweaver. > Source control can be remote also. Set up a source control > "server". Each developer has a login and permissions to > the code. This prevents a couple of things. > > The only caveat is that all developers need to be religious > about updating their local code daily. Yes, I'm aware it CAN be done, but in many situations it's not PRACTICAL to do that. Why bother with all the overhead for a site I'm going to have to edit three files on once every couple of years (if that)? There are also other people making changes which have no concept of version control (they hire a designer who uploads new stuff to the site and has to tweak the header and footer files which also contain CF code, etc.). I'm certainly not arguing against the benefits of source control, I get that; just that it's not the be-all end-all solution to remote file access. Sometimes working on a site over FTP is the most practical way to get things done. Having an editor that supports that mode of working is important for those who need it. -Justin ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:310940 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
