:-)

We really seem to have got bogged down in trivialities, and are trying to
decide things in the wrong order (hence, partly, all the arguments.)

I spent last night learning about Zope (http://www.zope.org) . There is a
12-page Zope tour at http://www.zope.org/Tour/ar01.html . Please go
through at least that before you comment ;-)

Of the things we need, it provides:
- an enterprise-level management system for a large website
- low barrier to entry for contribution
- extremely fine-grained permission controls (much better than currently)
- easy to add interactivity (another big must)
- Administerable via Web, FTP or WebDAV
- Excellent (almost CVS level) change control
- Standards support (HTML, CSS etc.)
- Simple URLs which relate to the content (as everyone seems to want)
- Can embed MySQL calls for easy Bugzilla etc. integration
- Built in search engine
- You can rearrange stuff easily (which is very hard with CVS)
- The wrapper implementation would be trivial
- Easy migration path

In addition, mozilla.org has very good relations with the Zope folks and
we may well be able to borrow a Zope guru or two to help with the
implementation. Having someone who knows nothing of Mozilla working on it
will do wonders for its accessibility.

I also assert that, in Brendan's words, Zope is "the best open-source
solution to solve a well-understood problem."


I assert that we use Zope for www.mozilla.org version 2. I further assert
that, in order for us not to use it, someone will have to:

- name a problem that we have that Zope does not or could not solve - i.e.
using Zope prevents us from solving it
- name an alternative basis for the website that solves all the above
problems and that one as well

Making this decision gives us a firm basis to work from, and a new angle
on a lot of the other decisions we are making. I think it's the first firm
decision we need to make - either for or against Zope (and, if against,
then for some other system.)

Whatever your views on the Zope question, please also express views on
that last assertion. 

Gerv

Reply via email to