We are working on a flex project where we want to balance two challenges
a) want to ensure that there is minimal need to be connected to internet- so it can be used offline. This will be used in rural locations with flaky connections
b) Reduce file size by only embedding those assets in compile mode as is required
Broadly, the project will go down one of three flows in the module called, based on user choice- Path A, Path B and Path C, which will require image set-A, set-B & set-C respectively (based on settings in the module)
We want to send over all images in Set-A or set-B or set-C right upfront in the module called, based on choice made in primary project, to minimize need for connectivity once accessed. At the same time I want to avoid sending all three sets and bloating up download size three times.
The question is how do I conditionally embed images such that if I am going down path A, the module sent down only has images of set-A
We had to solve a similar problem with asset localization, and we ended up creating external RSLs to link in "asset packages". However, this does require a bit more attention to the build process, since you have to pay closer attention to linkage and dependencies across RSLs. Most of these problems go away if all of your libraries are linked as external as apposed to merged-in-code (not just for your app, but any local libraries you may use as well). This is not necessarily required, but it does help ensure everything you need gets linked in.
Are you compiling Flex on Fly/Runtime from primary project on server?
If NO, its mean you are compiling it in IDE, in that case i suggest build 3 Application
For Path-A B nd C, you dont need to rewrite whole application again just ReWrite Application.mxml for three apps and emebed rrelative assests in them
IF YES, same ans seprate app.mxml for each path
EDIT: Anotther option is conditional compilation It is To include or exclude blocks of code for certain builds, you can use conditional compilation
hopes that helps
Related
My code is divided into websites, one for each module (in TFS). Also, I have some application level code (like loginpage.aspx, webconfig.xml, Configuration.xml, Common.css, Logo.gif, masterpage.js, mainmaster.master, mainmaster.master.cs, etc) which is common for all module level websites. Is there a way I can reference the common application level files in each module level website. I want to avoid multiple copies of the application level code, by using a reference or some other mechanism.
The best way to handle this kind of shared code is in your solution-structure, so TFS can stay straightforward and your common code is not duplicated localy either.
So try to make the common-code shared by creating a project that provide baseclasses where the other projcets (the websites) can build on.
I've struggled with a better solution for the following setup. I'm not actively working on this, but know some that might appreciate other ways of handling this.
Setup:
Tridion-managed page has a single "linked list" component Linked list
Single component has component links to other components in Tridion
Linked-to components often link to multimedia component (mm)
An XSLT component template (XSLT CT) renders XML with above content and with links to PDF
XSL document() function used to grab embedded (linked-to) content, all content converted to XML nodes and attributes
TCMScriptAssistant namespace with publishBinary() publishes related PDF and other media
Page template just outputs the result of the CT
Business requirements:
improved publishing (last I worked on this, some of these files created a 2GB publishing transaction because of the PDFs)
published XML content file must reference the associated PDFs; hyperlinks work but identifiers might not help because of...
no Tridion content delivery APIs, mainly for independence from the storage database but also to avoid Tridion-specific code on the presentation server (loosely coupled setup and less training for developers)
The biggest issue is the huge transport package during publishing. The second problem is publishing any of the linked-to PDFs will cause the page to republish.
How could this setup be improved or re-engineered, preferably without too many changes to the existing templates, though modular templating could be considered.
Dynamic component presentations could possibly work, but would need to be published to the file system and not use dynamic linking or broker objects (e.g. no criteria filters, binary metadata, etc).
There are indeed 2 questions. I will handle them in reverse order.
To prevent the page from being republished when you publish a binary, you can use the event system in older versions of Tridion (pre-2011) to turn off link resolving, or with newer versions you can use a custom resolver to prevent this. There is an article by Nuno which explains this(http://nunolinhares.blogspot.com/2011/10/tridion-publisher-and-custom-resolvers.html)
Your second one is a bit tougher, in no small part because of your criteria for not using the SDL Tridion CD APIs. I would have suggested publishing the binaries separately (this would keep the file size down of your transaction package), and using Binary Linking to resolve the paths at request time.
Given this is not an option, I think the only was I would approach it would be to still use dynamic component presentations, and then use predictable unique file names for the PDfs (i.e. use something like 317-12345.pdf based on the URI), and use one directory for all the binaries. That way you could enter the paths to the binary using your XSLT template, as you know where the binaries will be located later. You could then use a custom resolver to publish the binaries when you publish the main list component or page.
Hope that helps
Chris
I have a sneaking suspicion that what I'm looking to do can be done more elegantly within Xcode 4 ... but then I've been wrong before. Here's the scoop:
I have an iOS app with the usual debug/release builds and regular, unit-test, and ui-test targets. Nothing unusual there. The app also calls out to a server. Nothing special there either. Except ...
Now I want to be able to build the app for four different server environments: Development, QA, UAT/Beta, and Production. In addition, each build must be able to co-exist on the same device, for developer builds or ad hoc distribution.
So let's see ... how might this pan out? Each app will need its own target identifier for starters. Perhaps detecting the kind of build could help target which server to use:
Debug builds target Development.
(Ad Hoc Distribution) Release builds target QA (... or UAT/Beta?).
(App Store Distribution) Release builds target Production.
As for those Target Identifiers (com.companyname.appname), I suppose I could use different Info.plist files for each build ... but that smells unwieldy (duplicate info). Perhaps it's the only way?
Bottom line: I'm uncertain of a) how to resolve the Ad Hoc vs. App Store Distribution cases, as well as b) the QA/UAT cases, as well as c) how to do this without messing up the (at least to me) more elegant setup Xcode 4 offers with those simple "Press Play" Debug/Release build ops.
Maybe I have to add new Schemes? Perhaps it's simply a matter of adding more Info.plist files ... or builds ... or configurations ... or targets ... or some mixture. Again, I'm trying to keep from duplicating a lot of info (only to change one or two settings) if I can help it. Debug/Release seems very clean as it is, and I want to make sure I change things along the proper axis. Measure twice, cut once, as they say.
Clues welcome/appreciated!
Here's what I ended up doing. Hopefully this is the most sensible way to go about it:
For now, I combined QA and UAT. (This may be split later on.)
I made three Info plists, one for Development (Debug), Beta/QA/UAT (Release), and Production (Release). Each of these has slightly different bundle display names, bundle identifiers, and bundle names, but is otherwise identical. (THIS is where the lion's share of duplicate info will be. Have to change things in all three - for instance, if I add a new font or URL type.)
I created a new configuration, Beta (based on the original Release/Production config), so now there's Dev, Beta, and Production configs as well.
In the Provisioning Portal, I set up App IDs using the previously declared bundle IDs, and generated new certs for Beta, Dev, and Production. (The existing app ID ends up being used for App Store releases.)
In the Build Settings, I used Conditional Settings to specify the appropriate Info plists and code signing identities.
I think this will do the trick! If there's a cleaner way, however, please weigh in. Thanks!
I’m a fan of the new VS 2010 Web.config transformations. I use this feature for deployment purposes and wondered if it is possible to use them for debugging too.
I think of using them in the IDE: I want to create different built configuration (with linked transformation configurations); choose one of them; start the web site in the IDE and debug the different configurations this way.
Update
Thanks to a 3rd party plugin, SlowCheetah, this is now possible. Scot Hanselman has a blog post about it.
Original response:
Unfortunately, the web.config transformations appear to effect only publishing sites and building deployment packages.
In our scenario we have two development groups, one with access to multiple environments (in-house) and the other with access to a single environment (offshore). We have periods where the in-house group needs to debug directly against QA, while offshore remains locked-out (so their web.config's must point to the dev environment).
We were hoping to have 1x build-configuration per-environment, and be able to choose the build-configuration which matched the environment to debug against--which, as I understand it is your question.
In case anyone is curious why they haven't built this feature, from:
http://forums.asp.net/p/1532038/3711423.aspx
"When the web app gets run, the web.config under project root folder will be picked up by asp.net and I know unfortunately it is under source control . I certainly understand the cleanness coming with letting runtime use a transformed web.config from a temp folder; however, asp.net runtime doesn't know anything about vs projec structure and it is totaly based on directory structure. Using alternate path might also break as a web.config under a subfolder expect to inherit settings from the upper level of directory."
I found an alternative solution that does not involve any third party tool: http://ledtalks.blogspot.in/2011/09/webconfig-transformations-when.html. I only tried this for the web.config file
I'm sure there's a simple explanation for this, but I haven't had much luck at finding the answer yet, so I figured I'd put the word out to my colleagues, as I'm sure some of you've run into this one before.
In my (simple) dev environment, I'm working with a handful of WCF Web Services, imported into my FB3 project and targeting a local instance of the ASP.NET development Web server. All good, no problems -- but what I'd like to know now is, What's the right way to deploy this project to test, staging and production environments? If my imported proxies all point, say, to http://localhost:1234/service.svc (from which their WSDLs were imported), and all I'm deploying is a compiled SWF, does Flex Builder expect me to "Manage Web Services > Delete", "> Add", recompile and release ever time I want to move my compiled Flex project from development to test, and to staging, and ultimately into production? Is there a simpler workflow for this?
Thanks in advance -- hope my question was clear.
Cheers,
Chris
If you have path names which will change depending on the enviroment then you will likely need to recompile for each environment since these will be compiled in the swf.
I typically use ANT scripts to handle my compile/deployment process when moving from development and production environments. This gives me the ability to dynamically change any path names during the compile. These build files can be integrated into Flex Builder making this process very easy once you have everything set up, and can be done with one click or scheduled.
Thanks Brett. I've been meaning to dig into automating my build processes anyway, so now's probably as good a time as any. :)
You do not need to build a SWF for each environment. Here's a technique I use commonly:
Externalize your configuration properties into an XML file; in this case, it could be a URL for each service or a base URL used by all your services
When the application starts up, make an HTTPService call to load the XML file, parse it, and store your properties onto some bindable "configuration object"
Bind the values from that object against your objects that depend on the URLs
Dispatch an event that indicates your configuration is complete. If you have some kind of singleton event dispatcher used by some components in your app, use that, so that the notification is global
Now proceed with the rest of the initialization of your application
It takes a little work to orchestrate your app such that certain parts won't initialize until steps 1-5 take place. However I think it's good practice to handle a lot of this initialization explicitly rather than in constructors or various initialize or creationComplete events for components. You may need to reinitialize things when a user logs out and a different user logs in; if you already have your app set up to that initialization is something you can control then reinitialization will not be a problem.