Dave,

If you're building an app that will be distributed widely, be a little
careful. We've got an app that we're selling to smaller clients, and
sometimes we run into trouble with the mapping for the app. At this point, i
see it as a restriction on our business - i can't market the thing too
widely because we'd run into trouble hosting the sites at the price point
that makes sense for this app. Either i'd need to provide hosting among a
lot of different web host providers, to spread the instances out 1 app per
server, which would be a real hassle for us to keep track of. And i'm not
too keen on experimenting with lots of webhosts. Or we'd need to set up
dedicated servers for our app and partition them into different instances of
CF. Whoops.

>From your post, it sounds like that's what you want to avoid. There are
moments when i wish i had seen ahead clearly enough to do the same, but from
a programming perspective, using mappings seemed to make so much sense. It
does!

Roland Collins works for a company that sells a widely distributed app, as i
understand it, and also from what i understand - so that he can avoid using
mappings - he avoids inheritance. He's also pushing for a way to create
application specific mappings with the next release of CF so he doesn't have
to hamstring the way he uses CFC's in his apps.

If he could post a summary of points how they structure their application to
avoid the use of mappings or custom tag paths, so it's just plug and play, i
think that would be pretty keen. From what i've seen, he's thought this thru
carefully. I'm wondering about rebuilding our app in such a way myself.



-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Dave Merrill
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 9:05 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [CFCDev] Basic component inheritance path question


If you want components in various physical locations to inherit from some
app-specific classes, where would you put those ancestor classes physically?

The 'extends' property of a component wants a static string, not a variable.
So, the paths it sees have to either be in the same directory as the
descendant component (not practical for common ancestors to components in
many locations), or they have to be full paths. For a full path, if it's
from the web root, it breaks if you move the app or deploy somewhere with a
different directory structure. If that happens, or you want to guard against
the possibility, you could create a mapping whose logical path is the same
as the canonical app root you used in your 'extends' properties, pointing to
the actual app root. Right?

So either your app has to be installed in a specific location relative to
the web root, or a specific mapping to where the app actually is has to be
created on any server you deploy to.

Is this the state of the art, or am I missing something obvious here?

Thanks,

Dave Merrill




----------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to
[email protected] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the
email.

CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by CFXHosting
(www.cfxhosting.com).

An archive of the CFCDev list is available at
www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]






----------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to 
[email protected] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the 
email.

CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by CFXHosting 
(www.cfxhosting.com).

An archive of the CFCDev list is available at
www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]


Reply via email to