If you are planning to continue using COM in your applications you might as well get used to staying with outdated application servers. All current application servers are moving away from COM support including Microsoft's.
Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -----Original Message----- > From: Smith, Don , , WHS/PSD [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 1:20 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: CFMX and CFObject > > The sad truth is that if I can't solve the CFOBJECT problem by COB tonight > that I'm reverting the server back to CF5 until the next round of patches > come out. I'm just not convinced that the product is ready for prime > time. > I mean, of course, I want to take advantage of CFCs, but currently the COM > objects are, you know, about 5x more important. > > I started talking to other developers who were equally disappointed with > the > way MX processed their older code and they suggested not using MX in a > production environment until a later version. The only thing I remember > getting warned about were CFX tags. I was apparently spoiled that my old > code would upgrade from 3 to 4 to 5. I remember upgrading to 5 with zero > problems- plug and play. This really threw a monkey wrench into our > upgrade > schedule. > > A coworker is also experiencing failures with the JDBC datasource on one > particular database. For some unknown reason, the password gets deleted > after we run a page with a database error. Has anyone else been forced to > re-enter their password in the datasource multiple times? > > Don Smith > ______________________________________________________________________ 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
