hi stefan, > For what Mathew needs, I believe separate workspaces and a separate > repository system might be a good idea. > Here is why, he says that he is in a portal environment. That means he > has different sites with different sets of users. None of these sites > have data that needs to mingle. i agree if two applications don't share anything you need completely separate repositories. separate repositories and separate workspaces are a different issue though.
separate repositories means that you do not share nodetypes, namespaces or versionhistories or any admin features. i would argue that matthew will share the same nodetypes across his different applications therefore or users (superusers or powerusers) that oversee multiple sites and need to for example create new sites. but of course i don't really know that. anyway, it is important to clearly distinguish the requirements for separate "workspaces" and separate "repositories". > What if these sites are set up as > completely different webapps? So each webapp would have its own > repository, db, index and everything else. They could be accessed as > http://domain.com/site1 and http://domain.com/site2. > Would this make sense? i agree that separate repositories may be feasible. since our wcm customers are running large numbers of public facing websites off a single repository workspace and i have not found a drawback with that architecture yet (on the contrary) i would probably in the future also choose the same architecture again. regards, david
