Michael,
You're missing the point. This has been discussed, at length, numerous times. The problem (as Lars points out) is that the amount of effort required is high.
I am merely asking that if you having nothing to contribute (i.e. you're not going to build any of it) then please don't spark off yet another debate about software that ain't going to get built. Its like fitting wheels to a tomatoe, time consuming and completely pointless. ;o)
As for funding, Lars I think you make an excellent point but, as I've mentioned before this community has neither the structure, direction nor the will to conform that would make significant investment possible.
The money is there. It could be pushed into the OpenACS, we could attract funding, but not while the community remains this informal and fluid.
I don't see how any commercial organisation (and significant cash will come from there) can be expected to push its money into the product when there is virtually no structure or control whatsoever. I would just be too risky. The only way it will happen is when one of the companies here needs a CMS so badly that it will fund it.
If that happens that of course the CMS developed is most likely to be the one that company wanted, not whats best in the medium/long term.
I'm not saying its impossible Lars, but I think it wold be more likely if some formalisation takes place.
