[Pydotorg-redesign] The Zope question

[Dylan Reinhardt]

On Fri, 2003-08-08 at 16:04, Kevin Altis wrote:
> Q: Does using Zope or another system for CMS mean that content has to be
> served dynamically?
> A: I don't think so. The staging server might be the CMS and python.org and
> its mirrors would be based on that. That is a pretty common setup.
> python.org doesn't have dynamic database driven content (except the wiki),
> shopping carts, etc. AFAIK

You are correct. Using Zope does not inherently impose any requirement
that content be served dynamically.  


> Q: If there was a CMS like Zope/Plone, how would changes to the site be
> tracked and could changes be backed out?
> A: ?

If the chosen CMS were Zope/Plone, changes can be tracked in a number of
ways.  

Zope provides its own version control, allowing you to revert to old
versions of objects.  There is a trade-off, however, for the longer you
store history, the larger (and faster) your database grows.  Version
rollback through Zope can raise dependency issues in certain cases.

A more robust system for revision control is provided when Zope's
database is stored as a collection of files, one per object revision. 
When stored this way, Zope's entire data set can be managed with your
favorite revision control tools.

So, in a nutshell, yes.  It can be done through-the-web *and* it can be
done correctly. :-)

> 
> Q: Could/should the CMS incorporate changes from the command-line, static
> page additions, or something outside the normal CMS interface which is
> likely browser-based?
> A: I would think so if the CMS is done in Python.

A running Zope process is easily scripted from shell and a non-running
Zope installation can be imported and controlled by a Python script.

Furthermore, it is easy (given the right privileges) to import static
files in as Zope objects.


> Q: Can the current process evolve in stages to a CMS?
> A: I think so.

Evolutionary change is both possible and advisable.

As one example, it would be easy enough to create a subdomain that is
managed by Zope and leave everything else as it is.  You could use a CMS
to provide a howto/whitepaper library.  If that sucks, nothing's lost...
the existing site still works.  If the file library takes off, maybe
we'll have other ideas of what we should be doing in a CMS.  Or maybe
we'll be happy with what we have.  Seems win-win to me.

Dylan