Thanks for getting back to me so quickly. I will look into this. It is a declarative transaction management solution. I was originally considering implicit transaction management since the relation was to a single data source, with limited object interaction (do you see any problems with this). However, I recently read an article about .NET 2.0 introducing System.Transactions name space. Pretty neat stuff.
Thanks again, Justin -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Massimo, Tiziana e Federica Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 4:20 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [CFCDev] Basic component inheritance path question > Currentely I am using slashes whenever I invoke a CFC, not when I define a > CFC type. I have the feeling Mark is using slashes for the same puropose, > but I may be wrong. I've took another look at Mark's blog, he is indeed using slashes for CFC type. It has been a busy day here, time to get some sleep :-) Massimo ---------------------------------------------------------- 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]
