>2) There are still name conflicts. If I distribute an app that requires, >say, a DSN and a CFC mapping (probably the minimum needed for most complex >apps) I can author that application to use ANY DSN name in case the >recommended name is already in use. I can't do that with CFCs. > >With CFCs I would have to edit all of the CFCs that reference fully- >qualified names (and if you're using CFC type validation across packages >you need to use FQNs) if I couldn't use the recommended mapping (because it >was already taken by somebody else).
This becomes extremely problematic when trying to run simultaneous builds of the same code base. There's no way you could currently run two different builds of Mach II on the same server. Anyone writing a library of components is in for a real headache if they have to maintain two different builds--all because of mappings. As a developer, I should be able to create two folders anywhere in my site, drop the MachII folder into each and be able to run them in a way that no name collisions occur. (Ignore the fact that normally you'd only want one instances of the MachII components on a single server--I'm trying to make a point.) Does that help? ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' in the message of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by Mindtool, Corporation (www.mindtool.com). An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
