FYI, one of the biggest concerns we have when developing Mach-II is backwards compatibility. So far we don't know of any BC problems as far back as Mach-II 1.0.9. Recently, a company I know was upgrading from 1.0.9 to 1.6 -- a big leap and I've heard no complaints. You should be able to drop in 1.8 on any application and it should run just dandy (doesn't mean you shouldn't do your due diligence and test). Be sure to follow the Upgrade Instructions in the README file otherwise a few upgrade gotchas might get you.
.Peter Eric Cobb said the following on 09/16/2009 12:56 PM: > I haven't played with any of the 1.8 stuff yet, so it sounds like I > really need to take a look at it and give the call-method stuff a try. > > Thanks, > > Eric Cobb > http://www.cfgears.com > > > > Jason Blum wrote: > >> I was just drafting a response, also highlighting the very cool >> call-method syntax - precisely because it really drove home - for me >> anyway - the ideal of listeners so dumb and simple that in many cases, >> you don't even need them at all. -Jason >> >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Adrian Scott <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>> Listeners versus services is a totally subjective topic, but my >>> thoughts on this are as follows: >>> >>> I like think of services as objects that should be able to stand on >>> their own assuming no Mach-II elements are present, e.g. you should be >>> able to access all of the functionality of your application without >>> having to first go through the Mach-II framework (listeners in >>> particular). This allows you to utilize all the same code and logic >>> at different levels, such as utilizing your services for remoting >>> purposes (such as webservices or Flex). Listeners to me should be a >>> fairly simple pass-through that collects data which exists within the >>> event scope and transfers it to the service. >>> >>> That being said, I'd recommend using the Mach-II 1.8 call-method >>> command as much as possible, since it really forces you to shed your >>> overuse of listeners and makes you really harness the power of having >>> your logic within services (see: >>> http://greatbiztoolsllc.trac.cvsdude.com/mach-ii/wiki/MachII1.8CallMethodCommand). >>> >>> Assuming you've done all that, you are no longer married to the Mach- >>> II framework in order to run through your application's logic (not >>> that I would leave Mach-II... it's too rad). >>> >>> Adrian. >>> >>> On Sep 16, 8:14 am, Eric Cobb <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> In a recent Mach-II discussion on Listeners and Services >>>> (http://groups.google.com/group/mach-ii-for-coldfusion/browse_thread/t...), >>>> Joel Cox made the comment "Your listener *should* be fairly simple, just >>>> passing the necessary event args into the service. Let the service >>>> itself do the heavy lifting." As I thought about this comment, I >>>> realized that I may actually be using Listeners wrong. To be honest, I >>>> think I'm doing the exact opposite of what Joel suggests. In fact, I >>>> know I am after reading this quote in the Listeners Wiki entry: "It is >>>> important to mention that it is not recommended that any business logic >>>> appear here, but is kept outside of Mach-II." >>>> >>>> After reading through the Wiki entry I realize that you should use >>>> Listeners for getting Mach-II logic over to your Services, and keep that >>>> logic out of your model. In my (first) Mach-II application, I've been >>>> using Listeners a little differently. I've basically been using them to >>>> do the heavy lifting, with most of my business logic being in my >>>> Listeners instead of my Service components. My Service components >>>> really just have a few basic CRUD methods that interact with my >>>> Bean/DAO/Gateway components, and that's about it. >>>> >>>> So it looks like I need to reverse my thinking and get all of my >>>> business (non Mach-II) logic into my Service components. Does that >>>> sound about right? Since I am somewhat of a beginner to Mach-II, I >>>> would love to see a discussion on how some of you use Listeners to >>>> interact with your Services. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Eric Cobbhttp://www.cfgears.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to Mach-II for CFML list. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mach-ii-for-coldfusion?hl=en SVN: http://greatbiztoolsllc.svn.cvsdude.com/mach-ii/ Wiki / Documentation / Tickets: http://greatbiztoolsllc.trac.cvsdude.com/mach-ii/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
