Michael Wilson wrote: > >> On a similar note, I much prefer that my developers > >> know the internals of a system instead of working blind. > >> Not so much that they can make changes but rather so that > >> they can understand the reason why things work out the > >> way they do. > > This is the very essence of Fusebox. The entire framework is built around > the idea of a standard architecture that improves team development because > everyone is on the same page.
Yes, but the earlier comments I was responding to were suggesting that Fusebox allows individual developers to know Fusebox but not have to know the specific details of the current FB implementation. For example, the developer can know to read the FuseDoc at the top of the file and can know to plugin <FORM ACTION="#someXFA#"> but not have to know that sometimes this form targets "foo.add" and other times targets "foo.edit". As an example of why this is problematic, if the developer doesn't know about both targets, he can't know to test his code against both targets. It also makes it more difficult to debug any problem that crop up. Adding some code to fix one problem may unknowingly cause another problem when going to a different target. > >> Fusebox seems to add the additional overhead of *ALSO* > >> having to create a virtual file structure > > I have never looked at it in terms of a virtual file structure. I can see > how this could seem like overhead and many have been confused by it (mainly > due to lack of documentation). The concept is simple enough; you are merely > creating an alias to a directory path within fbx_Circuits.cfm. For example: > <cfset fusebox.circuits.foo = "dir/dir2/dir3/foo";>. Instead of using the > path you can use "foo". If you need to move foo, you need only rewrite one > line of code. I understand that circuits are merely aliases for physical directories. Perhaps I should have put quotes around "file system." I realize that the circuit hierarchy is not actually a true file system, nor is it intended to be. It is, however, an organizational scheme around which individual files are arranged (Just like a file system). My point was that, whereas in a non-FB site you only have to deal with the physical organization structure (the file system), in FB you have to also deal with the virtual or aliased organization structure (circuits, nested circuits, etc.). I realize this is not really an issue with smaller sites, but it seems like it could be a royal pain on a significantly large and complex site (which is touted as one of FB's strengths). > >> Let me give you a more fleshed out example of the > >> security privilege dialog. > > I believe Hal Helms has addressed this issue in a paper he wrote some time > back. I do not have the URL handy, but I am sure it is on his site > somewhere; http://www.halhelms.com. I believe his method allows for control > via permissions down to the fuse level. I am not as current on Fusebox 4 as > I should be; however, I think I have heard mention of this being built in or > available through the new plug-in feature. His document is located at http://halhelms.com/writings/ProposedSecurityModel.pdf. Two things to note; (1) I wasn't actually talking about security in Fusebox... I was talking about a sample example of a case in which I would agree that a form could truly be made reusable, sort of, (2) after skimming over Hal's document, I disagree with his idea of what *is* universal about security. Not to go off on this, as it's not really relevant to the current topic, but briefly, he states that "security comes down to restricting access to a portion of code." This is true of action-level security but not of object-level security (in which a user can perform the action but only on certain objects). -- Mosh Teitelbaum evoch, LLC Tel: (301) 942-5378 Fax: (301) 933-3651 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.evoch.com/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
