I think that depends on what you mean by safe. If you mean safe in terms of not getting hacked then the basic rule is the fewer processes you have running, the better your chances are, but other than that it's pretty hard to say quanititatively.
If you mean safe in terms of the apps from CF5 not interfering with CFMX and vice versa then I don't think you can really say for sure. I suppose it depends on the apps themselves. If you have apps that talk to a lot of 3rd party systems and do a lot of filesystem type access you could well run into problems, but exactly what those problems would be is anyone's guess. Ultimately I think it depends on how critical the application is, and how expensive it will be if anything goes wrong. Why do you ask? Spike > -----Original Message----- > From: Russ Michaels [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 13 August 2002 00:58 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] Evaluate is bad WAS RE: [ cf-dev ] > Looping over fo rm - syntax? > > > On a similar topic. > How safe do you reckon it would be to permanently run CFMx (on its own > webserver) and CF5 together on a server. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Spike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 12 August 2002 20:39 > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] Evaluate is bad WAS RE: [ cf-dev ] > > Looping over fo rm - syntax? > > > > > > I heard Jeremy allaire mentioning that it could be done, but > > that you'd have to pay a CFMX license for each CD you > > distributed. I think that was off the record though, so the > > official word might be different. It might be possible to > > distribute your apps using an eval version of CFMX. Again, > > you'd need to check with someone at MM about that. > > > > Spike > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Taz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: 12 August 2002 21:33 > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: [ cf-dev ] Evaluate is bad WAS RE: [ cf-dev ] > > > Looping over fo rm - syntax? > > > > > > > > > > > > > You can do that with CFMX too. > > > > > > I was thinking about that recently, since MX is java and > has its own > > > web server, it makes sense really. Question is.. has > anyone done it > > > yet? I really ought to pay more attention to > > Guru etc. > > > > > > > Do you have any idea if you would have to pay a per CD > license for > > > BlueDragon? > > > > > > No idea. You'd have to ask them. > > > > > > Don't suppose anyone knows what MMs view on it is? (Lucas?) > > > Personally, I can't see it being a problem... possibly > the opposite > > > since its just going to increase the use and awareness of the > > > ColdFusion language. The more well known it is the better. Plus > > > people are always going to buy MM CFMX > > > for the bigger projects anyway, mainly because its > > > Macromedia, but also because of the extra functionality > > > (Verity, flash integration), also more developers will buy > > > studio, MM certification, etc. > > > > > > Maybe I'm just talking arse! > > > Taz > > > > > > > > > -- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] For human help, e-mail: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] For human help, e-mail: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] For human help, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
