[CLOSED] [#364] CDN Subjects/Comments/Questions.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
  1. #41
    Tested. It's good, but there's no reason to test issecure. Change the code to the following:
                        CDNPlusVer = string.Format("//speed.ext.net/ext.net/{0}.{1}.{2}", ver.ProductMajorPart, ver.ProductMinorPart, ver.ProductBuildPart);
  2. #42
    Thank you for the suggestion.

    Though:
    http://www.paulirish.com/2010/the-pr...-relative-url/

    Caveat: When used on a <link> or @import for a stylesheet, IE7 and IE8 download the file twice.
    So, it looks better to set up it explicitly. What do you think?
  3. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by Daniil View Post
    So, it looks better to set up it explicitly. What do you think?
    Okay. No problem. I wasn't aware of that issue.
  4. #44

    Everything broken...

    You forgot all the old files on your new CDN!!! eg.
    http://speed.ext.net/ext.net/2.2.0/extjs/ext-all.js --> 404
  5. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by Johannes View Post
    You forgot all the old files on your new CDN!!! eg.
    http://speed.ext.net/ext.net/2.2.0/extjs/ext-all.js --> 404
    Fixed. Might take a few minutes before they're online.
    Geoffrey McGill
    Founder
  6. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by Daniil View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by michaeld View Post
    The descriptor.Resource is pretty obfuscated by the time it reaches GetUrl which means that the programmer needs to deconstruct it after you already constructed it (expensive).

    The ideal would be that instead of obfuscating the resource name, instead have the parts as members of ResourceDescriptor so the user can construct it their-self.
    Yes, it would be nice to have more control here. Thank you for the suggestion. We will try to do something.
    It was improved. More details you can find in the blog post dedicated to the v2.4 release (it should appear very soon).
    http://www.ext.net/blog/
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions