FrontPage, InterDev and Web management...

it's definately a good idea to have dev and prod servers, as we manage to crash our dev server quite frequently (especially when working with server side dll's).Copying the sites from dev to prod is really easy and shouldn't present any problems. InterDev (my version anyway) will tell you if there is a newer copy of a file on the server than the one you're about to release, but it doesn't offer any real source control. We do it by each developer having their own site, to which they copy the files from the main site to work on. When they've finished, they copy any changes they've made back to the main site. This is OK with a small number of developers, but if you're intending to have more than one developer working on the same page at the same time it might be worth looking into getting some sort of source control tool.

So it is good to have one prod server... and perhaps several dev servers (perhaps one on each workstation that the web developer is working on)?

Also, it is better to use InterDev with projects of such magnitude since FrontPage is not as good with keeping track of changed pages... also FP's discussion web's get messed up usually when copying from one server to another... etc. etc. Correct?

Also, how does one manage DLL's, MTS, registerting etc. remotely when building e-commerce webs with dev servers and prod servers using these Microsoft development products?

When you're using both FP and VI as development tools, you've to be extremely cautious on editing asp's. It's always better not to edit asp's in FP. In content view it's always possible to delete the asp code assuming it as a blank line. Moreover, FP has it's own rules of generating the HTML code which can mess up with asp code. Use FP only for STATIC HTML pages. I NEVER suggest asp code maintenance with FP.

Whenever there's a possibility of number of users editing the same file, It's always better to have a source control mechanism. This problem becomes complex as the number of developers increases. Hence tools like MS SourceSafe are very useful in maintaining the source code. It's also useful in switching over to previous versions of files without much effort, And eliminates errors in manual version maintenance.

Cool... so, I should really use VI to publish the pages... rather than FP. Just use FP to change static pages. Right?

I think that about clears it up... you can have the points.

DLL's are a pain in the neck if you've only one dev server, as after the dll has been called by the web service they tend to get locked, so you can't update with a newer version without a lot of messing about (I usually reboot as it's quicker) I run PWS on my workstation, and use that to test dll's. Another bonus of having you workstation as a web server is the script debugger: you can step through client and server code on the same machine. I'm not sure you can register dll's remotely. Perhaps PCanywhere or something similar will let you. As rajgn says, I would also recommend SourceSafe as a good source control tool.

Cool... so, I should really use VI to publish the pages... rather than FP. Just use FP to change static pages. Right?

I think that about clears it up... you can have the points.

Excuse the duplicate messages....

So, it can get pretty complex, and there is really no one way to manage such a thing. Sounds good.

Thanks again...

VI should be your entry / exit point since it can do source control when combined with SourceSafe.  That way, there will be less possibility on 2 person overwriting each other work.  VI is good for management.

FrontPage is useless unless you are doing simple sites.  Althought  the capability is there, I would not recommend using FP to do ASP.  And the I know what you want so I am going add this and that code myself "attitude" of FrontPage is definitely destructive and frustrating at the same time.  Again, use VI as your main tool and use FrontPage only when authoring a separate simple static web / part of a dynamic web (but only static pages).

So, since I am dealing with a large Web site, it is good to have a root web, and within that several other webs. Can VI to sub-webs on one IP?

Also, when many developers are working on the same FP web, should there only be one person who publishes? Or can both publish with VI... under a source-safed environment of course.?

Thanks...

yep, VI can handle loads of sites hanging off the root web all on one IP. We have one root web, and 13 others within it.

and using sourcesafe with VI would mean that only one person can publish at a time because only one person can check a file out at a time, although other developers can get the latest version, and work on it in their own web.

Sounds good... so who gets the points?

Does anyone use the MMC to create a Web site? When do you use the MMC to create a Web site... or do you ever? If you do you use, why?

Thanks...

PS. acsmith can have the points since he answered the most.

Unless there is a different policy for giving points away in a multi-answered question?

Thanks...

Thanks...