At 17:41 12/01/2001 +0000, Gervase Markham wrote:
><delenda est>
>
> > I'm all for using something like this to manage the solution, but its not
> > the whole solution.
>
>I'm not claiming it is. I'm claiming that using it (or not) is the first
>decision we should make (because it has ramifications, big or small, on
>almost all of the other decisions.) If you think there is a more
>fundamental decision that needs to be made first, let's hear about it.
Oh well I still see them as separate domains and not really dependent on
each other. Agreeing on a logical structure I find more important but it
doesn't affect deciding on how the site is managed. You can decide it now
if you think its a solution for the short term if its a longer term
solution then its a significant candidate so long as it works, I like
choices though.
In the longer term it would be worthwhile putting up a pilot site and
getting an idea as to how acceptable or not Zope would be. The pilot site
needn't be very complicated but it should let us exercise all the major
areas. Then if any other candidates turn up there's a benchmark against
which to decide.
Again if this is to solve the current site in the short term and that is
going to get attacked straightaway then sure it looks worth doing.
>Hence my last paragraph:
>
>"Whatever your views on the Zope question, please also express views on
>that last assertion." (That assertion being that it's the first decision
>we need to make.)
I don't think its the first decision no, I think its one of a couple of
equally important and to a large degree independent decisions. I'm a
horrible pedant sometimes but I'm keen not to lose sight of the need for a
good logical structure now, but that is for implementing in the long term
and not immediately.
>Gerv
===============================================
The more exotic the Project name the more ordinary the Product
S.P.L.
