Ok so I work for a company who is involved with creating multiple mortgage websites around specific cities in the US. There was an old way of doing this (creating new websites) in ASP that worked well...probably not the best way but it worked.
So now the move to .net and things have been more than difficult to say the least. Site production has slowed to barely crawling. The old way in ASP there was a template folder that contained the entire site-to-be....only one configuration file needed modifying...make the database connection and bam you had a site ready for market.
Now with the new "upgraded" version instead of a template folder that contains a site there is one File structure all sites are "going" to run from ...all expcept a unique folder for each site that contains the images and style sheets.
Now of course the approach just mentioned makes sense and technically you would think reproduction of sites wouldnt be any harder than it was previously in classic ASP. However it is, much, much harder.
Flaw I have seen:
City A may have a page (exampleA.html) that City B does not....currently how it is working is that in this case ExampleA.html is dropped into the main site folder structure that all sites run from.
Just getting into the site myself but this brings up questions as to the logic surrounding the entire project.
My guess is that the CSS files and layouts are different enough from page level to page level that the work one needs to put into each page level to make them look good in all browsers causes a serious bottle neck.
They are working with .net1....
Anyone with experience in dealing with similar scenarios?
Any suggestions as far as easing site reproduction in relation to this situation?
Biggest advantages of going with .net 2.0 with this project?
Any more information needed to help someone help me?
Any cons to using one main folder structure for all site...even if they number into the mid 100's?
Any other info is most appreciated.
Thank you Thank you,