With the right
naming convention changes, that will probably work, but I completely understand
what Howard was saying: Certain elements that may be shared, for example a
library of i18n functions, or a security component, should stand apart from each
individual application. However, certain application-specific elements, for
example the i18n text values, or the application layouts,
should never, never be placed in a potentially shared
environment.
eric laney, did
you get my email?
--
Eric C. Davis
Programmer/Analyst I
Georgia
Department of Transportation
Office of I.T. Applications
Web Applications
Group
404.463.2860.158
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 1:56 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [CFCDev] MVCF at benorama.com
I am in a situation similar to Eric Davis, in that my team develops software exclusively for internal use. We are in the process of consolidating our multiple web servers into a cluster of servers behind a hardware load balancer. We will end up with multiple applications of various sizes, all on one (virtual) server. Many of these applications have nothing in common. Some have a few custom tags or other libraries that they share. At this time, we have no standard methodology, but I'm leaning toward the use of MVCF.
I really don't see any reason so far why I couldn't use the MVCF application-specific directory structure and make each application an island unto itself. I don't think the overhead will be significant. Am I oversimplifying and missing something?
"Howard Fore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]03/25/2003 12:51 PM
Please respond to cfcdev
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject: Re: [CFCDev] MVCF at benorama.com
On Tuesday, March 25, 2003, at 11:43 AM, Davis, Eric wrote:
> In fact, the only glaring weakness I can see in your MVCF (which I
> really do like, I promise) is that it only seems to concern itself
> with a single application on each server, or a single application
> deployed amongst several servers. I'm in the opposite boat, developing
> lots of small applications for internal use only, that all must reside
> on the same server. Adapting your MVCF to fit this system is going to
> be quite difficult, I fear.
Hmmm. I think the difficulty will be dependent on how much is shared
between the apps. The cfapp-config.xml file looks like it would support
more than one app. But shared components would be an issue. I'd like to
see a shared section and application specific sections. But then you
may get into issues of namespaces for the components. Still, that would
help your situation I think.
--
Howard Fore, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"The dinosaurs became extinct because they did not have a space
programme" - Larry Niven
----------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email
to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word 'unsubscribe cfcdev'
in the message of the email.
CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported
by Mindtool, Corporation (www.mindtool.com).
