From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Aug 4 13:27:58 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from jade.chc-chimes.com (jade.chc-chimes.com [216.28.46.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71A9815443; Wed, 4 Aug 1999 13:27:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from billf@jade.chc-chimes.com) Received: by jade.chc-chimes.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id B2B521C0E; Wed, 4 Aug 1999 15:29:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jade.chc-chimes.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADFFE3816; Wed, 4 Aug 1999 15:29:37 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 15:29:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Fumerola To: Bill Swingle Cc: Nik Clayton , advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: advocacy site In-Reply-To: <19990804130757.A90374@dub.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 4 Aug 1999, Bill Swingle wrote: > These are exactly the issues that need to be resolved. The idea of a > database back end for the content is nice but is it really necessary? If > we can for go the DB backend, integration with the existing site would > be much easier. I think that solving this one issue would make the others > quite a bit more addressable :) True, however, with a website that should be very dynamic, do you want to see 500(well, not that many) commits a day to an advocacy tree? Databases accept remote connections for a reason. -- - bill fumerola - billf@chc-chimes.com - BF1560 - computer horizons corp - - ph:(800) 252-2421 - bfumerol@computerhorizons.com - billf@FreeBSD.org - To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message