The old cfx_IIS tag has done the autocreation of dies from CF for years.
"This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Gateway House, 28 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DN, 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: Dave Watts To: CF-Talk Sent: Sat Jan 20 20:25:27 2007 Subject: RE: Apache config > Apache lets you keep the .conf file in a source control > system like subversion. It lets you easily copy and paste > and create new configurations. I can set up a template for > new virtual sites and have CF automatically create a new conf > file, and do a graceful restart on apache and voila, I have a > new site set up. To do so with IIS would be a lot harder and > would probably involve some convoluted API calls, which you > can't do from CF anyway. Actually, you can easily do the same thing with IIS, without needing a graceful restart. The IIS API isn't convoluted, and IIS comes with a bunch of sample scripts showing you how to use the API. There's even one specifically for creating new virtual sites. You can call the API easily enough using CF, if you choose. You could, if you choose, put the IIS metabase in a source control system like subversion - with IIS 6 it's just a big XML file - but IIS has its own metabase backup functionality as well. The funny thing about your statement is that you seem to think that not having an API is better than having one! > I agree it is out of date, and a bunch of things have been > fixed especially with the 2.0 version. The plain truth is > that Apache is just better. Apache has some features that IIS doesn't. IIS has some features Apache doesn't. You can say "Apache is just better" as much as you like, but "better" will clearly depend on the environment you're working in, and the problems you're trying to solve. In many cases I've encountered, IIS is a clearly better fit. In many other cases, Apache is a clearly better fit. In still other cases, it doesn't make any significant difference. > CF beats the pants off JSP because it makes web development > easier and faster. We like CF because that's what we do most > of the time, and we would rather it be something that we can > be more productive in. If I only needed to use CF once a > month, and I could use JSP for free, and I knew JSP well > enough, I would probably pick JSP. It's most likely faster > anyway. My point was simply that ease of use is an important feature. You can either agree or disagree, but you seem to want to do both. > There are things you can do with apache out of the box that > you would either need to buy custom ISAPI filters for, which > would probably crash half the time, since they're made by some > one man companies, and are not open source for many developers > to work on and fix. There are also things that you just can't > do with IIS, to my knowledge. For example, let's say you want > to set up a SES url, something like > > http://www.example.com/AboutUs > > and you want that url to go to > > http://www.example.com/index.cfm?page=AboutUs > > There is no way to currently do that with IIS AFAIK. With > apache it's a simple rewrite directive: > > RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^.*example.com $ [NC] > RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} ^/(.*) $ [NC] > RewriteRule ^(.*)$ > http://www.example.com/index.cfm?page=%1 [P] Well, if you're using CF, you don't need to do that at the web server level at all: http://www.doughughes.net/index.cfm/page-blogLink/entryId-37 You'll notice that this is an SES URL, on an IIS 6 server, that points to a simple description of how to set up SES URLs with CF on any platform. But, if I did want to do that with IIS for non-CF URLs, as I have before, I'd simply use ISAPI_Rewrite, which is available in two flavors - a free version and a $50 "pro" version. I've never had any problems with it, and I've used it for large, relatively high-traffic sites. I used the free version, actually, because it did everything I needed. As for the whole open source argument, no, IIS nor third-party IIS tools are open source. For something that is essentially a commodity, like a web server, I have never needed the ability to edit the source, I wouldn't be qualified to edit the source, and I suspect that this is true for many of the people on this list. Out of curiosity, are you an Apache committer? If you're not, have you made changes to the Apache source? If you do make changes, what do you do when a new version comes out? How are you any better in this respect than the "one man companies" you mention above? Now again, I'll agree that there are plenty of things that Apache does better than IIS. There are plenty of things that IIS does better than Apache, however, which you seem unable to comprehend. Finally, and this is the part that's most important, for most web developers it simply doesn't matter what web server they use! So, your constant evangelism of Apache doesn't really make much sense to me, in that context. > Ok, maybe not so simple, but once you get the hang of it, you > can feel the power. Just like using linux for servers > instead of windows. It takes time to learn how to administer > it, but once you do, you'll never go back. For one thing you > won't have to worry about monthly security patches. They > silently download at night without ever needing a reboot. My > Linux server has been up for 91 days. People have their > servers up for years at a time without rebooting. Can you > say the same about windows? Actually, the vast majority of Windows patches no longer need a reboot, and if you think 91 days is an impressive uptime number, well, I'm sorry to say, but most of my Windows servers have higher uptime than that. > Apache *is* easy to use - you simply have to take a moment > and figure out how to do things with it when you've never > used it before. You do that with every new piece of software > you ever use. Different does not mean difficult. I do not > consider occasionally adding a line or two to a text file > difficult - but it is different then IIS and different then > the way most MS software works. Different does not mean difficult, but clearly some interfaces are more intuitive than others. Apache is easy to use, once you know how to use it. IIS is easy to use, even if you don't know how to use it! Surely, you can see a difference there, right? > > > Apache beats the pants off IIS, but it has a bit of a > > > learning curve. > > > > <troll> > > One important measurement of how good a product is, is how > > easy it is to learn and use. > > </troll> I think you misplaced your tags; they belong around the previous sentence, unless you have a very strange definition of "beating the pants" off something. > Dave, I have to disagree to a point. Ease of use isn't the > question, really, it's 'What is the best tool for the job?' > IIS doesn't handle multiple domain setups in IIS on WinXP > simultaneously, therefore it doesn't meet my needs. Well, sure, that's a rational thing to say. When I do development on my XP laptop, I occasionally use Apache, for exactly this reason. But, if I didn't have to, I'd just use IIS for that, because Apache doesn't really bring anything to my development process on my laptop. Honestly, if you could've just used IIS, would you have bothered to switch to Apache? Are you finding that having Apache installed on your laptop is giving you anything other than the ability to run multiple virtual hosts? Do you now feel compelled to say that it's worthwhile for everyone to switch to Apache? 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! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7 Experience Flex 2 & MX7 integration & create powerful cross-platform RIAs http:http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;56760587;14748456;a?http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=LVNU Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/message.cfm/messageid:267057 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4
