[Pro] Splitting Large Website

I am re-designing a large website that I’ve taken over from another FreeWay user. He split the site up over three FW documents largely because of FW’s habit of occasionally re-uploading the entire site. I am considering combining the three FW documents into one.

My question is, does FW still have a habit of re-uploading unchanged files? (This site has 100s of image and large pdf files). I experienced this quite often in FW 4 and FW 5. I skipped 6 and am now cutting my teeth on FW 7.

Thanks everyone!

Doty


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

If you’re redesigning it anyway then why not integrate a CMS? If it’s that big then it certainly sounds like a good candidate, plus it will make your life so much easier in the long run.

Todd


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

Thanks Todd,

For a variety of reasons, this site is not well suited to a CMS. And, even if it is, I’m too far in the design process to tackle that beast now.

Doty


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

Ok.

As for the not well-suited aspect I find it very hard to imagine that’s the case given the variety of available CMS options. If at some point you would like to share some details as to why, I for one would be interested in knowing more.

Todd

Thanks Todd,

For a variety of reasons, this site is not well suited to a CMS. And, even if it is, I’m too far in the design process to tackle that beast now.


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

In my experience switching a site to a CMS one tends to force
compromises in design details and can, initially at least, take much
more work than any individual incremental manual update. I’m not saying
a CMS is automatically a bad idea, not by any means. My point is that
just because something can be CMS-ed doesn’t mean it’s going to be
easy or quick.

And I do worry about design shifts that a client may not want, imposed
because of under-the-hood changes.

k


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

That depends greatly on the system. Some are extremely rigid and can result in those kinds of compromises you’re referring to while others are wonderfully free from such restrictions.

And I was not implying that it would necessarily be quick or easy, only that it would pay off as a long-term investment.

Todd

In my experience switching a site to a CMS one tends to force compromises in design details and can, initially at least, take much more work than any individual incremental manual update. I’m not saying a CMS is automatically a bad idea, not by any means. My point is that just because something can be CMS-ed doesn’t mean it’s going to be easy or quick.

And I do worry about design shifts that a client may not want, imposed because of under-the-hood changes.


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

And I was not implying that it would necessarily be quick or easy,
only that it would pay off as a long-term investment.

Absolutely. :slight_smile:


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

My two cents is that I prefer splitting big sites - or even medium sites.
Especially if they have a natural division (front-end public pages vs
back-end member pages, or a shop, or a portfolio, etc.). It is a bit of a
hassle keeping your style code in sync, but if you are minimalistic and
well-disciplined then the reward is only having to update what is
necessary.

I can’t speak to 7, but I find 6’s uploading behavior unpredictable -
sometimes an action will force it upload unchanged stuff so I just assume
Murphy’s Law in the details.


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

Freeway has always erred on the side of caution, uploading stuff if it
doesn’t know categorically that it isn’t changed. Technically, it’s
better for our site users that it doesn’t err the other way, but it’s
pretty frustrating for us to have something uploaded over and over again
when you know it hasn’t been touched.


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

As far as CMS integration with FW, my only experience has been with Blogger (somewhat painful, but doable), and Pulse (less painful, but still somewhat design restrictive). I don’t need to edit old, but rather just add new. So, whatever can be gained by a CMS system would be rather limited in my case as I am happy to do individual incremental manual updates when needed.

Now, as to the issue of splitting the site. There is a password protected member area (the bulk of the site) and a few public pages. So, there is a natural division.

I’m thinking of trying one single FW document to limit the amount of external site links I have to deal with. I’m also hoping to use the responsive features of FW 7 and I don’t want to have to do some of this work again and again because of separate FW documents.

Ernie, I’m sad to hear FW 6 is still unpredictable in it’s uploading habits. I’d like to hear from others about their experience with FW 7. So far, I’ve only used 7 on one small site and haven’t had to deal with this issue.

Doty


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

Fair enough.

One of the reasons I suggested a CMS is because I often find clients take a very short-view of their needs, it’s all about what they need right this moment and not how to prepare for their inevitable changing needs, often in a short period of time. They say that don’t need a CMS but then all of a sudden they decide they want to start editing their own content, or allow other people to edit, or add a blog or this or that, and the next thing you know you’re back at square one, only with even more work to do. Whether or not they ultimately use a CMS I at least try to get them to take a longer view as it benefits all Parties and can often save time, $ and effort.

Also, Blogger is not technically a CMS.

Todd

As far as CMS integration with FW, my only experience has been with Blogger (somewhat painful, but doable), and Pulse (less painful, but still somewhat design restrictive). I don’t need to edit old, but rather just add new. So, whatever can be gained by a CMS system would be rather limited in my case as I am happy to do individual incremental manual updates when needed.


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options