Thanks for monitoring this Vernon. And my comments below are not meant to be personal.
However, I'm one who rarely uses FTP or RDS vis CFStudio (actually, I have yet to get RDS working right - one day, when it becomes important). That said though, I am a developer who knows how to manage my files and develop my own architectures as needed. The Site implementation of DWMX forces me to create a site, hence creating a Site file, hence imposing file management on me. If the features of UltraDev 4 are still present in that my connection strings and such are stored in another file somewhere, then I also have an architecture decision imposed on me. I don't need that level of hand holding. I want to be able to work with my files, without having extra files created "for" me. I want the simplicity that DW promises for some of the features, without having to create an architecture I don't want, or is not relavent to my application. And this still has nothing to do with FTP/RDS. As for checking in/out of files - I uss VSS for that, why would I want to implement another tool? As for synchronization, Sites impose only two locations on you - local copy, and remote copy. However in a good development environment, there are likely to be 3 or more locations. Currently we have a development server, then our QA server, then our pre-production server, and finally our production server - never mind our sandbox server (where development which will impact on other users happens so as to minimize inconvienience), and then a completly unrelated testing server for proof of concept work. The site "feature" doesn't allow for any of this in an easy manner - unless I want to create a "site" for each of these locations. On the plus side, I think the site feature is a decent option for lesser experienced developers (who will quickly become frustrated with the limitations imposed on them), or designers (who do not need to deal with these issues). It DOES have it's place. Just make it an option - even a default option, but give me some way to turn it off. CF Studio is a fantastic tool with features galore. However, you don't need these features to use it effectively. We treat it as a basic text editor, with some use of code snippets. Otherwise, we manage our files ourselves, and synchronize the files between the various locations ourselves - much more control this way, and easier to fix the "oops" issues. We don't use the Project option, because that is inherent in our directory structures and revision control software. And if Sites are equivalent to Projects in this case, then why would I use it or need it? My appologies for the rant. But it seems that there is some basic understanding of how DEVELOPERS/CODERS work missing from some parts of MM. I'm grateful to see you and the other MM employees who frequent this list take interest in our concerns - gives me hope for the future of CF, and the development tools. Shawn Grover -----Original Message----- From: Vernon Viehe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 3:03 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Macromedia Folks: What are you thinking? I wanted to talk to some of our most seasoned CF'ers around here before I got back with you on this. We stepped through what was necessary to set up the RDS connection and edit files both in CF Studio and DWMX, and what the fundemental differences are. We think we've boiled it down to a few relevant differences. 1.) You must declare a local root folder: Keep in mind, you don't have to d/l the whole site to this folder. In fact, you can view files in the "remote" view so that you're looking at them live on the server. When you double-click the file, it will appear to open directly in DW (what actually happens is that DW d/l's the file to the local folder you declared in the definition, if you chose "Edit files directly on the testing server" in the site wizard, or chose "Automatically upload files on save" in the regular definition box, DW will upload the file as soon as you hit Save.) This is in effect the same as editing live on the server, with the exception that you will have a local copy of whichever file you edited, saved in a corresponding location in the local folder. All in all, this doesn't seem to present any barriers to one's workflow, it's just a different methodology whose results are pretty much the same in both programs. 2. There is no option to use FTP/RDS in the save-as dialog box: This means that to save & upload to another site/location other than the site currently chosen, you have to first save it to the corresponding location in the local root folder of that site, then switch to that site's definition in the files window to "put" the file. This can require a few extra steps which I can see being a pain if you need to save the same file to several sites often. Otherwise, if it's in the current site, then the option to Automatically upload on save pretty much takes care of this. If the FTP & RDS Explorer in the save as dialog is important to you, please let us know by using the Feature Request and Bug Report form at: http://www.macromedia.com/support/email/wishform?6213=6 I hope this helps! Vernon Viehe Community Manager Macromedia, Inc. Online diary: http://vvmx.blogspot.com/ ______________________________________________________________________ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
