Geoff, I looked at the link below and had this feedback about the mappings:
"must create another compulsory CF mapping /reactor" - might not be true, you could include reactor under the webroot of the application. In this case the mapping is not required. "must create yet another CF mapping for /reactor/projectname (though this is fully customisable); possibly could use /farcry/projectname/reactordata instead" - might not be true. If the data directory existed under the webroot you can just refer to it as /yourDataDirectory and no mapping is required. With regards to manually editing the reactor xml, this may not be true too. All of the <config> values can be passed into the reactorFactory via a config bean when the factory is initialized. However, the object mappings will still be required. Frankly, I'm really excited to see this! Doug -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Geoff Bowers Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 8:18 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Reactor For CF] Reactor Licensing; integration with FarCry CMS On 4/11/06, Doug Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How cool is that? I'd be absolutely geeked to see reactor used in such a > prominent location! FarCry has its own DAO library that works a treat for what we call "content types" but auxillary tables (of which we appear to be getting more and more) and external integration of other applications leaves little to be desired. We've already got a working model of Reactor running with FarCry -- just trying to work out how not to make installation and deployment of FarCry any harder than it already is for some folks. Plus.. trying to make sense of how we'd provide an upgrade path for people and ensure that Reactor doesn't get in the way of our standard version control practices for projects. For those that might be remotely interested.. I've been trying to record some thoughts on the integration here: http://docs.farcrycms.org:8080/confluence/display/FCDEV30/Reactor > I know that I am lacking information in the current release related to the > license. However, Reactor is LGPL. I believe LGPL and CPL are compatible. > Does this give you what you need? Yup.. that should be just fine. Best regards, -- geoff http://www.daemon.com.au/ -- Reactor for ColdFusion Mailing List -- [email protected] -- Archives at http://www.mail-archive.com/reactor%40doughughes.net/ -- Reactor for ColdFusion Mailing List -- [email protected] -- Archives at http://www.mail-archive.com/reactor%40doughughes.net/
