Is it a good practice to include version information along with the name when you are uploading a static resource. For example, I am uploading a file "Bootstrap-3.3.5.zip" in static resource, Shall I name my static as "Bootstrap" or "Bootstrap3"? What would you suggest in long run? Please share your thoughts.
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
I would suggest calling it something general like "Bootstrap". Although appending versions might sound like a reasonable idea, it breaks down when a new version is released and you have to go through every VF page to update the markup to match the current version of Bootstrap.
Keeping all names, folders and files consistent will keep your resources up to date without generating additional, unnecessary work.
Just my thoughts!
-
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. If we give general name like "Bootstrap" and if you are looking at VF page which has used above static resource then by looking at VF page it is hard to say what version has been used here.– dogaCommented Jul 22, 2015 at 9:17
-
In that instance what I would suggest is, in a Sandbox environment, editing and changing the static resource with an updated version and amending the description field to dictate what version of Bootstrap you're using. That way you know all of your VF pages are on the latest version and the resource informs what version that is. Everything is centralised and in one place. You can then check the effect of the new version safely and deploy. Commented Jul 22, 2015 at 9:25