As long as you're only storing text, whether it be html or dtml or what, then LocalFS might be a good solution for you. You still get through-the-web content management, and lots of neat Zope-isms like acquisition. What you can't do is attach persistent properties to the files you store locally, not even as much as a 'title' property. If you need that ability then LocalFS is not the way to go. I don't see how Michael's wget solution will help you there either, though. --jfarr ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Bernstein" <webmaven@lvcm.com> To: <nspurrier@bluelight.com> Cc: <zope@zope.org> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 7:59 AM Subject: Re: [Zope] Bypass ZODB and use File System
Noah wrote:
What we really want to do is to provide a second view to /var/www/htdocs for Apache. I understand that Apache won't serve up our dynamic content, but that's not important. Zope is just viewed as a better solution for managing our static documents. The problem we have in my organization is that there is a lot of resistance to my prototype Zope document management system due to the fact that everything is stored in ZODB. We think this risky -- possibly a data prison.
The way my organization does it, is to manage the content within Zope, and to regularly run 'wget' on the server to replicate it all to static files, which are then served by Apache on another server. Doing that, plus regular backups of the Data.fs file (you're already making regular backups of your Apache based system, right?), and you should be guarded against any but the most catastrophicly unlikely disaster scenarios (you do have a disaster recovery plan, right?).
wget is really a very easy way to get documents back out of Zope, and if your system is designed to do this as a matter of course (perhaps by using 'cron'), it should silence those particular criticisms.
Also people don't want to change from their current habits of editing files via NFS or Samba mounted directories. My original plan was to allow them some sort of syncronization process, but now I think that would be crazy.
Hmm. I guess it depends on what percentage of your users want to keep doing this. You can certainly combine LocalFS with the approach that I outlined above. I would make it a special case. Keep the CMS server separate from the Apache server, and only allow the mounted directories on the CMS server. I've found that people appreciate being able to manage their content from anywhere through a browser, and they tend to gravitate toward that as a matter of course, once it's there, if they're not forced to do it.
In short, give people options, and see which ones they actually use.
HTH,
Michael Bernstein.
_______________________________________________ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )