Signe - while I'd agree with the purely technical advice given, I'd have to be frank and say that I would never advise the University to do this. It would be a waisted effort in my opinion for you or the university to spend any further resources on software that neither has an internal developer available or proper external support. They have in my opinion three options:
1) Redevelop the software using standard web technology for which there are many developers available. 2) Buy a commercial package 3) Adopt a mixed open source strategy The first 2 will involve a significant up front cost, and most likely result in limited (perhaps severely limited) functionality compared with a RunRev approach, but will work out in the longer run. Either of these are the "safe bet". The last approach means a painstaking and somewhat risky attempt to share development resources with other similar institutions and members of this community (you mentioned Sivakatirswami). Unfortunately the present community is not set up to develop open source projects where there is not a strong vested interest (the Metacard IDE). This will I believe and hope will change for the better in the near future. It has the advantage of costing only time - but that is a cost. It also has no guarantee of success, but putting more time into upgrading RunRev based software - without the likelihood of gaining another dedicated developer is not going to work either. If you think you would like to explore the latter (3), my guess is you may get a few people on this list interested enough to look at how we could host and develop shared code for use in Educational environments (you can include me) - if there is a will within the University and it matches a similar need outside - then you have an open source project. That backed with a little petty cash to pay developers (not me :) from this list and your in business. If not I'd advise against using Rev and go for 1) or 2). Hope that doesn't put a downer on things. On 16/03/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree with Ken. It would not hurt and would probably help to update > your materials to the newest version of rev. At a minimum, you should > re-build the "portal" standalone with the latest rev engine. In my > view that would help legacy stacks survive longer. > > Devin > > Devin Asay > Humanities Technology and Research Support Center > Brigham Young University Good morning and thanks to both Ken Ray and you for your advice. When you say the latest rev engine, do you mean 2.8? I have only 2.7, if I bought 2.8would I have to install Vista? What about testing on Window XP then? Can both systems be present at the same time? Signe Marie _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
_______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution