On 6/24/06, Dieter Maurer <dieter@handshake.de> wrote:
In what way would this differ from "zope.org/{collector,faq,wiki,...}"?
Well, for one, it´s simpler to set up, and does not rely one one single point of failure (and apache that does the rewriting) to each separate server. Secondly, what I'm discussing here is the principle of independent sites that run on independent servers and can be managed independantly, and upgraded independantly, and extended with new microsites independantly. If they are called zope.org/XXX or XXX.zope.org is a minor issue in that case, although I definitely preferr the last one fo the reasons above.
This way, you would have an integrating site ("zope.org") which would be able to provide integrationg services, e.g. a search where you are interested in a concept and happy to find hits in faq, wiki, product,...
That can be done anyway. -- Lennart Regebro, Nuxeo http://www.nuxeo.com/ CPS Content Management http://www.cps-project.org/