Open ayoungethan opened 9 years ago
We should compare the overall performance and expense (and other pros and cons) of using WP.org vs WP.com -- do we need the flexibility and features of .org?
Domain mapping costs $13 a year on .com, but leaves advertisements on the site. I think $100/yr gets rid of the advertisements and unlocks additional features: https://store.wordpress.com/plans/ such as CSS editing
Hosting needs to be handled by the end user if using WP.org, but we already need hosting for the OFS software, so that's already a given. What other reason is there to use WP.com?
It's easier for non-techy people (like me) to get started with. Not sure whether it's more cost-effective. Assuming the Federation takes care of the technical issues for installing/setting up WP.org, what's the best option cost-wise?
My concern is that Federation developers will be increasingly responsible for server management/maintenance/administration overhead...BUT, as you say, it's already needed for OFS hosting, anyway, so what additional overhead would hosting WP.org websites create?
If we have a standard WP.org template install script, then we can give users the keys to their website and some basic info on further customization, and expect them to find their own WP.org site designer/developers to customize the WP.org site proper.
At that point, the issue is making sure that 3rd party local website designers/developers don't have the capacity to mess with OFS installations or other cooperative websites.
@guising Thoughts on this? We are currently focusing on providing hosted OFS.org installations, and can probably break this out into three two different milestones/phases for hosted service provision:
With the hosting skeleton directory, it should be a relatively simple matter to establish a Wordpress template that can sit in parallel with OFS that will be suitable for basic installations.
Saueressen serves as first test case for shared server hosting for small startup local food hubs