I know some users have been getting frequent svn updates directly from branches/joesandbox2

I've suggested using it in the past in some forum posts but I want to give a heads up to anyone working from svn code to use branches/2.x instead

Instructions for getting the source code from svn on Windows with TortoiseSVN can be found here:
http://www.mojoportal.com/tortoisesvn.aspx
and for those who want to experiment with mojoPortal on Linux, svn instructions are here:
http://www.mojoportal.com/gettingthecodewithsvn.aspx

You can rely on branches/2.x being relatively stable. I merge my changes from branches/joesandbox2 into branches/2.x when I believe them to be stable enough to share with other developers.
Use branches/joesandbox2 only at your own risk as I need to be able to commit changes there whether they are final/correct or not just to make sure I never lose work due to hard drive failure.

I mention this because I'm about to start working on some things that may make things bumpy in branches/joesandbox2 because I will be making changes in the core and will probably implement some things in MS SQL long before I get the other data layers implemented and therefore joesandbox2 will be broken for the other layers until I implement them.

I have a customer who is sponsoring a new feature, or really a variation on a current feature and this is what I'll be working on. The customer has been using mojoPortal for a few small projects and they want to use it on a larger planned project but to meet their needs they need the multiple sites feature to work differently than it currently does. Currently the site id is determined by the host name so mojoPortal can host multiple sites on a single web installation and db as long as each site has a different host name like this:
http://host1/
http://host2/

Note that on the internet the fully qualified host name is usually used so the pattern is:
http://hostname.domainname.topleveldomainname
like
http://www.somedomain.info
where www is the hostname, somedomain is the domain, and info is the top level domain

Of course you also often see the pattern:
http://domainname.topleveldomainname
like
http://somedomain.com
the reason this works without the host name is that the domain has a default host that is used when no specific host is specified

My customer needs the ability to create new sites in sub folders beneath the host name like:
http://hostname/site1
http://hostname/site2
or examples with fully qualified names would be:
http://www.somedomain.com/site1
http://www.somedomain.com/site2

So in these examples the hostname is the same and the site id will be determined by the first level folder.

I don't plan to eliminate the hostname driven feature but to add a config option to use the foldername instead.

The sites will be completely independent with their own users and content just as they currently are using hostnames.

Some of the challenges will be in making sure the friendly url re-writing adapts correctly and making sure sites aren't defined using folder names that clash with physical folders

This feature is being sponsored as open source development which means it will become part of mojoPortal and other users of mojoPortal who may desire this functionality will benefit.