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 -----Original Message----- From: Denny Valliant To: CF-Talk Sent: Sun Jul 30 03:14:58 2006 Subject: Re: CF 8 feature survey 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 On 7/29/06, Rick Faircloth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 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 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Kear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 12:14 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: CF 8 feature survey > > 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 > > > > > > > On 7/30/06, Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 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. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/message.cfm/messageid:248157 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4
