James Green wrote:
>...
> 3. The server software.
> Must this site be served up by Netscape software? Can Apache not
> be used if we have the need?
IIRC, mozilla.org's policy is to use the best open-source solution for
any given problem. Why isn't this policy being followed for the Web
server?
> 4. Do we use CVS?
> I'm in favour of using CVS myself. The main arguments against it
> are:
> - cvs prevents some people from getting involved. I don't think
> this is a serious problem. People who want to make changes to
> the site are probably intelligent enought to figure out cvs
Unless, of course, they're like me and don't have any way of accessing
CVS at all.
I think people who have the ability and willingness to work with CVS
tend to be (or become) the ones who do actual programming, rather than
working on Web sites -- which is perhaps partly why the mozilla.org site
is as bad as it is.
>...
> - Because the site is so large, it should use a database. IMO, a
> database brings with it it's own set of problems and it's use
> should be limited to obvious database applications such as
> bugzilla.
>...
The problems caused by a database would surely be outweighed by those
solved by it.
At least we could have a compiler generating static pages from the
database -- so if the database goes down, the entire Web site won't go
down with it.
--
Matthew `mpt' Thomas, Mozilla user interface QA
