Ron,

Here is my question... Why does it matter if the CPF file is uploaded? All it is, is a list of the file locations on your computer, it has no hidden information on it. Why are you so adverse to these two files being uploaded?

I have no problem when it's my own site. Just extra work when it is a client's site that has to be cleaned up when the editor could just as well be made to put any none project files elsewhere and know how to find them when switching projects. Shouldn't have to manually move these files either as use of editor should be seamless and not make extra work. If I knew how to code, I would make my own editor. The problem is the same with those temp files (start with " ~... ") that show up in site folder once in awhile when using F9. If you don't catch those or wonder why your corrections are not showing up in your default browser when you refresh, it's because F9 generated a preview page with incorrect file name and not your actual file you are working on. Been doing this for years and was also report. This will be last post about this since corrective action is unlikely. One of the reasons why I don't report problems encountered with editor.

You moved them. Wouldn't you like to not have to do that and let the editor take care of all those files while you concentrated on the business at hand? As stated, the alternative is to leave them where they are put and get uploaded to server.

Not me, I am perfectly capable of taking less than 10 seconds to move a file or 2 to a different location when I make a new project, I can see no need for the CC Team to even think about this. The way it's setup is the logical way it should be. Move them and call it good If you are settling for the "alternative" of leaving them where they are, then that's just plain laziness lol

Let me also state the obvious. If CC had it setup so the files went elsewhere let's weigh out the consequences differences between now and then:

Now:
Your one and only post ever that I've seen on these forums that has ever asked for this to be changed in many years of being on the forums.

Then (if CC changed it to a different location)
Billions of posts from users who don't know where their files are for their projects so they cannot get them reset up correctly and instead they create multiples upon multiples because they rename them differently so that folder holding those files how has 5 .cpf files for each project and they would have to open each one to make sure it's the correct one etc. Truly this would be more of a nightmare than you taking 10 seconds to move your .cpf files yourself

As I read it, Ron was the first person ever to donate his time to CoffeeCup on this issue, and give them a chance to correct this bug. For every one person who says something, there are many who wont bother (particularly on this forum where constructive criticism gets shouted down, or deleted). Consider me the second person to donate my time. You're welcome.

Files that are not intended to be served to the public should not be placed in a folder that is routinely uploaded to the public directory of a web server. The significance of the file is irrelevant. What Ron suggests is simply the right thing to do. Unless of course, CC aspires to be a FrontPage replacement. In that case, go ahead and throw random files at the server.

First off, it's not a bug. It was designed to work like this. All Ron did was voice an opinion that he'd like it to work differently. Then it all got out of hand, which is what 'user forums' is all about. Discussions. If it were a 'bug' then we can't do anything about it. You should open a 'Support Topic' and let Coffeecup know about the issue and they could then explain why they did it the way they did. Or fix it.

That said, I agree with you, to a point. Files not pertinent to the web site should not be uploaded.

That said, I've seen to many users on this forum complaining about 'losing files', 'my hard disk crashed', etc . . . Makes sense to have a backup somewhere.

This is quite a debate. I can see two good countering arguments:

1) The .cpf mechanism is simple and robust (i.e. hard to break). Transfer of that tiny .cpf file to the Web server's document root has no effect on the Web site's operation. It's no big deal.

2) A .cpf file showing up on a Web server is junk that is not relevant to serving Web pages. It could be a confusing to someone uninitiated, who just might be an anxious customer. CoffeeCup should use a project management approach that doesn't permit that spurious .cpf file to reach the server.

Yes, this is trivial as such things go, but it is exactly why I put off learning how to use Projects on the HTML Editor when I bought it years ago. I worried that there might be some side-effect attendant to those .cpf files, particularly in Windows, which tends to hide things from the user. Better to let the Editor's project management advantages slide and just concentrate on learning Web craft. Besides, sometimes I did my Web editing on Windows with the HTML Editor, and sometimes I used another editor running on Linux: Maybe I'd cause trouble if changed my site's files without CC's management service knowing about it. Maybe everything had to be kept closely in sync. I didn't want to take any chances.

Now I've finally gotten around to trying the CC Editor's management feature. I wanted to try it because I'm no longer dual-booting between Linux and Windows, but am instead booting to Linux (Ubuntu 13.10) and running Win8.1 64-bit in a virtual machine. That way, Linux runs a local XAMPP server for development and holds my Web project files, while the CC HTML Editor running on Windows updates those files. Since the Editor is the only "actor" updating the files, I no longer have sync'ing worries.

I gathered from this thread, CC's documentation and my own experiments that there was nothing to worry about anyway. Too bad that it took me several years to reach that conclusion. I wonder how many other new or potential CC HTML Editor users have nursed the same doubts! Best not to scare off customers. I'm just saying.

I come down slightly favoring argument 2 above. I wish that CC provided an FTP filtering option, with the default set to "Don't upload .cpf files." But this is not a big deal, not worth losing a minute of sleep.

Sorry to go off piste a little with this, OK a lot, I'm sorry to bring this up, but I'm thinking of going back to Linux, are you saying you can still use the HTML editor on that? I'm hating Win8.
On the side point of this, I never use the FTP if this is what everyone is on about, but just use the hosting service FTP client and so just do the files I need, of course that defeats the purpose of this discussion

Just to clarify, the cpf files have no effect on anything anyone sees on a website. Halfnium you mentioned something about a customer seeing it and getting worried or something. Customers never see those files ever. To do that they would have to have access to your server files which doesn't ever happen unless someone gives you that access and well then you would tell them what those files are if they are uploaded. All those files are is this:

.cpf - tells the HTML Editor where the location of the files are that you want to use for a specific project. There is no, and I repeat, is NO syncing involved with these files, they are only location files for the editor to use when it's opening and saving projects. It does not have any of your server information (id/pw/location/etc.) in it at all so there's no risk to these files being uploaded.

.cpf - the same as above only for those using S-Drive so this file may have information on the server name and or location for uploading purposes, but once again I am doubting it has any ID and PW information in it (I could be wrong on this one as I don't use S-Drive).

Either way there's no risk and all benefit for these files to be there on the server as a backup. It hurts nothing, no one sees them, Google and other search engines could care less about them as they are not web files, and they just don't bother anything at all.

Anyone saying that these are cleanup issues, well then you have issues if you can't delete 2 stupid files when you're done with your clients site lol. It's not like it makes a ton of these things, it makes 2 and only 2, not on every directory, only in the main directory so cleanup of these files if you feel it's necessary, is just 2 secs to delete them from the server. Clean and simple

Having said that, they are movable as you already have read, very easily movable for that matter. But truly, the arguments here are just silly in my opinion as those files have always been there since Projects were created, and they are very useful.

Halfnium, I'm glad to hear you're starting to use the Project system. It's very easy to use, and uploading with the Editor is quite easy once you set that up.

Having said all that and being long winded as I usually am let me also clarify something else here. For CC to implement that these files don't get uploaded (which by the way I agree would be nice for those that cannot handle these 2 little files getting uploaded periodically lol), one of the biggest issues would be that those NOT using the editor to upload would still end up uploading them because CC would have no control over external FTP programs and what a person chooses to upload to their servers so people would still be uploading them. There are quite a few people that use the Free HTML Editor version and that one does not have upload capabilities at this time (not sure if it will, thought I heard Scott saying something about that happening soon, but.... ) so there are many people having to use external FTP programs to do their uploading. These people will still have issue with uploadint those files if they choose to upload the entire directory of their site so it will still be an issue for them.

Best to just leave it as it is and let people deal with moving them, deleting them or just ignore them (I choose to do the latter since they don't hurt anything, and I don't move mine either, I did it for the sake of the post earlier on just to test it and see how long it took, but I don't do that on a normal basis and mine are all back in the project files where they belong).

That's my rant and I'm sticking to it and good luck G'Kar on switching to Linux

G'kar (and anyone else interested),

I prefer Linux, but I also prefer the CoffeeCup HTML Editor to alternative editors available on Linux.

What to do? I'm running a VirtualBox virtual machine on Linux. Within that virtual machine I have installed Windows 8.1. I run the CoffeeCup HTML Editor and other Windows-dependent CoffeeCup products on that Windows installation.

[If you'd like to pursue running CoffeeCup's software in a virtual machine on Linux, I'd be happy to explain offline via the email address beneath this post.]

This doesn't save me any money. Indeed, the Windows OEM installation disk and license cost me $130. I do it because I prefer Linux, yet there are a few applications I value that are not built for Linux. These are CoffeeCup's software, Intuit's QuickBooks and a couple of very nice Microsoft game titles.

Sorry to perhaps have confused with the discussion of synchronizing. That turned out to be a red herring entirely. I tried (but apparently failed) in my previous post to explain that I had avoided the Editor's project management feature out of worry. For the last couple of years, I was dual-booting between Windows XP and Linux. I modified the same set of Web site files using one OS or the other from time to time. (Linux makes it easy to access the NTFS partitions that Windows creates.) Not understanding exactly how the Editor's project management feature worked, I feared that doing something with Editor Project files while running Linux might screw up the Project altogether: Perhaps I would subvert something in the Windows Registry, for instance. Rather than dig into the matter, I elected to simply not use Editor Projects.

I now understand that there was no possibility of a synchronization problem with my jumping around between Windows and Linux due to the design of the Projects feature. Furthermore, a synchronization problem is no longer even possible with the virtual machine setup: I now edit ONLY with the CC HTML Editor.

My point was that I missed out using Editor Projects for several years out of worry. If I could make that mistake, so could other rookie users. And that's too bad.

It's creepy to find a file unrelated to ones work objective included among ones work-related files. That's the conceptual objection to the .cpf file. Certainly the .cpf file can be moved and updated, as Rolly suggests. Alternatively, one can remember not to upload it to the server, or to delete it from the server after a bulk site upload. Ron points out that it's clunky to have to do that manually, something that has nothing to do with creating Web pages. Further, he is leery of his customer perhaps noticing the .cpf file on the server and being uncomfortable. Finally, certainly Jo Ann is correct that my proposal would not prevent uploading the .cpf file to the server via an external FTP program.

In defense of my proposal, it would involve merely adding an "advanced configuration" sort of checkbox to the Editor's FTP setup GUI. If the box defaulted to "don't transfer .cpf file to the server," casual users wouldn't notice, Ron and I would be slightly happier, there would be no need to replace the Editor's present simple and robust Projects feature with something else, and so there would be no reverse-compatibility problem for CoffeeCup to handle.

I say, don't worry, be happy. It's not a big deal, not even a tempest in a coffee cup. But I'd gladly accept that check box if Scott & Company offered it.