To my knowledge, there is now benefit or detriment to doing it either way. I do the same thing and I know other people who do also. I actually find it easier to deploy this way because I always have some kind of config xml file that loads at startup which contains things like the domain and endpoint in it. That way, when I deploy an app, the only thing I need to worry about changing is the config file. I don't spend a bunch of time trying to figure out server configurations and difference between my environment and a production/staging environment.
Jake Churchill CF Webtools 11204 Davenport, Ste. 100 Omaha, NE 68154 http://www.cfwebtools.com 402-408-3733 x103 From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of mikeashields Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 7:59 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re[flexcoders] moteObject endpoint= vs. Flex settings Primarily because I cannot seem to understand the CF Root Folder / Webroot / Root URL for a non-localhost setup (ie //DevServer/ColdFusion8/wwwroot along with http://testingIP:8500/projname???????) I have taken to using the endpoint property in RemoteObject as follows: <mx:RemoteObject destination="ColdFusion" source="test.cfcs.QuoteService" endpoint="http://174.1.159.113:8500/flex2gateway/"; method="getQuote" arguments="{event.symbol}"> What is the downside of this??? I assume if the CF-Flex settings are set "properly" then flex uses those to set the "endpoint" so in theory the benefit would be not having to enter endpoint in each time (in which case I actually prefer the verbiosity of the above method) but is there any other reason/benefit to either not using the endpoint OR to setting up the CF-Flex link?? -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/RemoteObject-endpoint%3D-vs.-Flex-settings-tp24084746p 24084746.html Sent from the FlexCoders mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
