Lennart Regebro wrote:
Martins answer doens't seem to have arrived here, so sorry for the weird quoting:
On 21 Apr 2008, at 11:53 , Martin Aspeli wrote:
Does it really matter whether a microsite lives in zope.org/projects/zodb or zodb.zope.org?
As mentioned, no.But it's important that it is it's own site, running it's own version of the software, so that it can be maintained seperately without having to upgrade all of zope.org.
... or die slowly because no-one has the capacity to maintain it.
I agree with Martin. We need to stop the balkanization of Zope-the-brand. Yes, we have many individual projects, but we need a coherent image to the outside world. Microsites was a good idea to get foundation site and the Grok site up and running *before* tackling zope.org, but in the long run, we need coherence.
Also, to be honest, I don't find the design of the new Grok website very attractive. And the foundation site is simple enough to be folded back into the main site.
I understand these points, but I repeat one last time: Zope.org has been in dire need of upgrade for more than five years. It got one in the beginning of this, and that produced a zope.org that wasn't very much better, and since then, nothing happened. The main reason for failure is that it is a monolithic gigant.
Don't make that mistake again.
Please.
No-one wants a giant site. Also, no-one wants a site with any complex bespoke software behind it. I think we can put this site live when we have about 20 pages of content. Then it can grow if it needs to, but not a lot. If one project really starts generating a ton of stuff and wants to add more functionality to the site, they will posssibly want to spin off a separate site. I don't see that happening any time soon, though, except possibly for Grok. Martin -- Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book