Neil,
Bad practice or not, I think many of us are stuck in the old days with
no source control and we open up files via RDS.
That said I am trying very hard to use this new thing and give everyone
at MM a chance.
John Venable
on 5/6/02 6:41 PM, Neil Clark - =TMM= at [EMAIL PROTECTED] most
eloquently stated:
> OK, "heeeeerrr's Jonny....."
>
> All who have commented......, I hear you on all levels. In fact 5 months
> ago when I learned that ColdFusion Studio was to be "merged" (at that
> time I thought Axed) I was livid, I held that standpoint for ages....but
> that said..
>
> But some of these 'complaints' are a tad out of bounds. I think
> especially the fact you have to define a local site as a major flaw is
> like being given a Ferarri for $1 and complaining that its one of those
> 'orrible yellow ones ;-)
>
> Dreamweaver is a fantastic product for many reasons, and I hope to point
> some of these out from both a Studio standpoint (my fave) and as
> die-hard Dreamweaver user. I have used and tested DW since Alpha 1 of
> version 1 and believe me I have had my fair share of gripes etc... you
> ask anyone in the Engineering Team.
>
> IMHO opening a file via RDS and/or especially via FTP is simply bad
> practice - it is an accident waiting to happen. You should get into the
> habit of always having 3 servers (or locations) where you have
> development / testing / live. It may be annoying but its how major
> player sites are developed, and its how small ones should also be
> developed. I worked on a site for Channel 4, a major television station
> in the UK and since then I have never worked anyother way, even on a
> small scale. Once a system is worked out, it isnt difficult nor a
> problem.
>
> You have to remember that Dreamweaver is built upon a true, tried and
> tested development process where 'sites', and these can be any kind of
> site - even a collection of non-connected files are placed in a location
> and are defined to Dreamweaver as such. This allows Dreamweaver to be
> able to open certain functionality to these collections be it
> ColdFusion, PHP, JSP etc.... it also allows it to recognise paths with
> images and alike. For me, I use Studio as a true code editor, I NEVER
> use insert image or any other kind of HTML insertion tool within that
> environment. In fact I think the only button I click in it, is
> ColdFusion Basic > ColdFusion Comment :-)
>
> That said the modern coding process requires that we use Source Control.
> As Vern stated you can use Dreamweaver with Visual SourceSafe, but I
> prefer Component Software's RCS which I have an extension which sits
> witin DW and you can check in and out files to the workspace. Again in
> my HO. Dreamweaver is lacking a decent version control system - maybe
> version 7 huh!
>
> You should not need to jump from machine to machine etc.... that�s what
> network mappings and ethernet is for ;-)
>
> Dreamweaver is also far more extensible than CF Studio, I have never
> needed to extend Studio - it does exactly what it says on the tin. I
> have seen versions of Dreamweaver which are simply unrecognisable from
> the Vanilla tool - that�s the beauty of it; if you want something in DW
> you can build it, or someone else will.
>
> Would there be a point in releasing the Studio code as GPL? What could
> the community add to an already "complete" product? Macromedia does
> bundle Studio <ahem> Homesite+ with Dreamweaver and it is basically
> Studio 5.5 or even 6. I can see no reason that Macromedia will drop it
> anytime soon, they still see that a pure coding environment is needed,
> it is just that Dreamweaver now crosses the boundary of Code v's Design
> - but NOT fully, and I don�t think it ever will - there would be no
> point - Dreamweaver is a great GUI tool, and it is now a great code tool
> - in many flavours.
>
> All in all, it�s a new tool and it�s a new way of working. I sometimes
> think when these threads start that what if Macromedia and Allaire had
> not merged and that Macromedia had released this version - what would
> the CF'ers say - even though Studio was still around? You so have to
> look back and se that Studio has in 1.5 version's not really had that
> much added to it; Dreamweaver on the other hand has evolved and grown to
> be a tour de force of code and design (when we mention design, we do
> mean visual HTML building yes and not Photoshop work?)
>
> It�s a case of use what you see works for you........ if it aint broke
> don�t try to fix it, sure, but we need to strive forward to stay ahead.
> Studio is a fantastic tool but it is dated and I can't see much more
> being added. If you love Studio, then use Studio or Homesite+ depending
> on your circumstances, if you love Dreamweaver - use that.
>
> Either way, suck it and see - you may be surprised what you taste.
>
> Neil Clark
> Team Macromedia
> http://www.macromedia.com/go/team
>
> Announcing Macromedia MX!!
> http://www.macromedia.com/software/trial/.
>
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com
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
