Hi Alex, Thx for your explanation. Based on what you just said, my understanding is that the answer to the question that I put out on the scenario is RSL from Step 1 would be the one that's still got loaded.
And you mentioned before the solution is publish new ones. When you said that, I assume that you meant that the RSL has to use the version-suffix filename i.e. RSL_ver1.2.swf. Appreciate the help. --- In [email protected], Alex Harui <aha...@...> wrote: > > My point is that there may not be a way using the RSL loading mechanism we > provide, because once we roll out RSL.SWF, we never change it so the > framework doesn't support any way of updating it and not having caching > problems. > > > On 4/23/10 12:40 PM, "handitan" <handi....@...> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Alex or anyone, > > I just want to make sure whether I am clear in explaining the issue that I am > facing. > Please let me know if my qs and or my scenario wasn't clear enough. > > Thx for reading. > > --- In [email protected] <mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com> , > "handitan" <handi.tan@> wrote: > > > > Hi Alex! > > > > Great to hear from you as always. > > I don't understand what do you mean by framework never revs RSLs? What's > > revs? > > > > Proably it would be better for my understanding if I use this scenario: > > 1. The following have been deployed: > > - Main_ver1.0.swf > > - Module_ver1.0.swf > > - RSL.swf > > > > 2. Our clients have loaded and cached thosed in their browser. > > > > 3. Then all those got update, now it becomes: > > - Main_ver1.1.swf > > - Module_ver1.1.swf > > - RSL.swf <-- this got updated but it's still using the same filename. > > > > 4. And they all got deployed. > > > > Now I know for sure our client will get the Main_ver1.1 and Module_ver1.1 > > without having them clear the browser-cache manually but which RSL are they > > going to get? > > Is it going to be the one from Step 1 or from Step 3? > > > > Thank you! > > > > > > --- In [email protected] <mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com> , > > Alex Harui <aharui@> wrote: > > > > > > I don't think there is support for that because the framework never revs > > > RSLs. You can do what we do and publish new ones or use modules and load > > > into the main applicationdomain. > > > > > > > > > On 4/22/10 9:15 AM, "handitan" <handi.tan@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I posted one of this question on a thread that's related to caching but > > > since it got hijacked by a totally different topic, I decided to create a > > > new thread. If you're going to talk different stuff, please make a new > > > thread. > > > > > > The issue that was raised because client doesn't load the newest and > > > greatest of your deployed app because it loads from the browser cache. > > > > > > To resolve this issue, please read this stackOverfow thread: > > > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/300757/preventing-flex-application-caching-in-browser-multiple-modules > > > > > > Now that solution works for the main swf and module swfs but what about > > > RSL? > > > > > > How do you guarantee that the loaded RSL is the latest one? > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Alex Harui > > > Flex SDK Team > > > Adobe System, Inc. > > > http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Alex Harui > Flex SDK Team > Adobe System, Inc. > http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui >
