info-cvs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: FW: Website development


From: Atkinson, Chip
Subject: RE: FW: Website development
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 14:31:09 -0700

Yes, we are using a content management system, BroadVision.  However, all
the logic that we put in and all the static content is in the form of
javascript files.  

I think we may be kind of screwed here depending on the desires of the
various developers.  Of course, one more source disaster and they'll be
ready to use just about anything including Harvest, CA's horrid CM system
that we (the developers) are trying to avoid at nearly all costs.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Noel L Yap [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 2:04 PM
> To: address@hidden
> Cc: address@hidden; address@hidden
> Subject: RE: FW: Website development
> 
> 
> It sounds like you're using some sort of content management 
> software.  I'm not
> 100% decided on this issue, but I'm currently leaning towards 
> the idea that
> content shouldn't be versioned the same way normal files are 
> since they tend not
> to be files.
> 
> I guess the ultimate problem is that a set of tools save 
> information to a
> database, not a file system (VAJ before 3.5 worked like 
> this).  Since most
> versioning systems version file system objects, there's no 
> way for them to
> version the stuff in the database.
> 
> I see no easy solution to this.  Either version control 
> systems will start to
> have to be tied to underlying databases (and most hooks into 
> the tools don't
> support concurrent development 'cos most of these tools support SCCI,
> Microsoft's broken interface), or tools will have to provide 
> usable ways to
> export their data to the file system, or these kinds of 
> software tools will have
> to start providing their own version control (blech!).
> 
> Noel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> address@hidden on 2001.02.16 13:36:19
> It's for an external site and is also using BroadVision, a 
> dynamic content
> package which restricts the developers from having a separate 
> server for
> testing.  That and the issues I mention below.
> 
> Oh, the other option is Harvest from Computer Associates.  
> Developers would
> rather go without a CM system than use it for day to day 
> stuff.  I make my
> boss put the things that I do into Harvest. :-)
> 
> Here's my plan now -- everyone is the same user.  No muss, no fuss, no
> individuality.
> 
> Actually a while back, the -d option that was mentioned 
> worked great from
> the command line, but with many insisting on a GUI, I guess 
> it's WinCVS.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David H. Thornley [mailto:address@hidden
> > Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 10:29 AM
> > To: 'address@hidden'
> > Subject: Re: FW: Website development
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Atkinson, Chip" wrote:
> > > Thanks for the information.  One thing that I've
> > encountered is the need to
> > > take very tiny steps with web development some times.  Part
> > of this is
> > > because browsers aren't like compilers.  Things like
> > > <tr><td>blah blah blah</td><tr>
> > > get rendered differently than
> > > <tr>
> > >   <td>
> > >     blah blah blah
> > >   </td>
> > > </tr>
> > > Icky stuff like that means that if you wrote the entire
> > page at once you may
> > > end up having to re-do the entire thing after you see how
> > it's rendered by
> > > the browser.
> > >
> > This is getting off-topic, but how much control do you have over
> > the people who are going to access this?  If this is a purely
> > internal web page, and you know everybody's going to use the
> > same version of Netscape or Internet Explorer with pretty much
> > the same settings, then it makes sense to consider the exact
> > difference between the renderings of the above.  Even then,
> > odd stuff like that may change for the worse any time your
> > company upgrades equipment or browser versions.
> >
> > If this is for external use, then people are going to use mostly
> > Netscape and IE, but of all different versions and option
> > settings.  Some people will be using a different browser, such
> > as Opera, iCab, WebTV, Lynx, old AOL, whatever, and you may wish to
> > consider them.
> >
> > So, for external use, you can't possibly know how the reader's
> > browser is going to render the HTML.  It depends on browser,
> > version, settings, window size, and possibly other thing.  About
> > the best you can do is write mostly standard HTML and look at it
> > in a few setups and see that it looks reasonable in each.
> >
> > > I guess to summarize, I'd like to avoid having to force people to
> > > drastically change the way that things are done in order 
> to use CVS.
> > >
> > Understandable.  It does sound as though CVS is a bad fit for
> > what you're doing right now and how you're doing it.  Whether
> > this means using something else or changing the process is a
> > judgment call.
> >
> > --
> > David H. Thornley                          Software Engineer
> > at CES International, Inc.:  address@hidden or 
> (763)-694-2556
> > at home: (612)-623-0552 or address@hidden or
> > http://www.visi.com/~thornley/david/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Info-cvs mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Info-cvs mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This communication is for informational purposes only.  It is 
> not intended as
> an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any 
> financial instrument
> or as an official confirmation of any transaction. All market 
> prices, data
> and other information are not warranted as to completeness or 
> accuracy and
> are subject to change without notice. Any comments or 
> statements made herein
> do not necessarily reflect those of J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. 
> Incorporated, its
> subsidiaries and affiliates.
> 



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]