ideal development and hosting setup for Frontier 9?

[Samuel DeVore]

On Tuesday, October 1, 2002, at 11:12  AM, Joshua Lipton/Slowtrain 
wrote:

> That's very interesting. I had been thinking of using Manila sites to 
> be repositories for general data. But it DOES make more sense to use a 
> general server as the static host and then reference everything in my 
> code and templates that way.
>  
You will certainly see performance improvements, this is the main 
reason that I like using os x, I can use the built in apache server and 
the native filesystem to move files around locally.  And the base 
system is very stable and usable.

> I will explore the webEdit thing that you mention. I'm sure there are 
> tons of things in Frontier that I have yet to encounter, and this is 
> one of them. Will webEdit allow me to move tables from one server to 
> another?
that is exactly what webEdit can do for you.
> If so, that sounds like just the solution for what I'm talking about. 
> With the ability to manipulate that kind of data on the server level, 
> and with remote web administration for everything else, it doesn't 
> sound like there's much that I'd actually need the server application 
> itself for via remote access.
I rarely need remote access to the server, usually just for things 
unrelated to frontier.

Sam D
>  
> Am I getting that right?
>  
> Thanks,
> Joshua Lipton
>  
>  
>  
>  
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Sam DeVore
> To: Frontier-Users at userland.com
> Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 1:01 PM
> Subject: Re: ideal development and hosting setup for Frontier 9?
>
> The way that I manage moving all the stuff around and keeping things 
> in sync is webEdit (built into frontier) The nice thing is that you 
> can even use radio as the client for a lot of the changes that you 
> need to do as it has webEdit built in as well (though it is a little 
> hidden) It handles custody and checking and checking out table 
> objects, it is also good if you are going to maintain a central db for 
> all your customizations that all the other servers can subscribe to.
>
> I think that at this point the best platform for hosting Frontier is 
> probably win 2000 (that is what userland seems to do most of their 
> hosting on though I use Mac OS X) there just seem to be to many issues 
> currently with the OS X version, though I am confident in userland's 
> ability to get these sorted out.
>
> For the rare times that I need to access the servers that I have in 
> remote locations I have been using VNC though I will probably move to 
> Timbuktu sometime soon for this (performance issues and security that 
> my clients feel more comfortable with) If at all possible I think you 
> want to set your server to have another application server any static 
> content that you can (gems, pictures, ...) as apps like apache are 
> much better at serving these files and it reduces load on frontier.
>
> HTH
> Sam D
>
>
>
>
> ====================
> Samuel C. DeVore sdevore at teachesme.com
> www.TeachesMe.com
> Because if you are not managing your content...
> Who is?
> See us for content management for teachers/schools/students
> =====================
>
>
=======
See a new experiment: a dad and his two girls
http://scidzone.editthispage.com
join, see and share......
=======
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 3575 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.userland.com/pipermail/frontier-users/attachments/20021001/aa95f404/attachment-0002.bin