Open Source Content Management Discussion? 109
Media Girl asks: "As someone considering the vast array of GNU/open source CMS systems out there (and right here), what have been the experiences, insights and opinions of developers on the various programs out there, such as Slash, Scoop, Drupal, PHPslash and the various Nukes? CMS Matrix has a nice comparison grid of features, but there seems to be a lot left between the lines, and the Perl powerhouses are left out of the matrix. How do the typical components (blogs, articles, comments, karma) compare? What about modality, security and speed under heavy loads? What about the quality of ongoing development and activity of the app's community? What's leading edge and not bleeding edge? And what about the Perl/PHP debate? Can we take a snapshot of this realm of open source web development applications and hash it around a bit?"
Community V. Content (Score:4, Insightful)
There's way too many content management systems out there that focus too much on the content aspect. I found it hard to locate quality open source CMS that wasn't trying to be Slashdot-like. Many people just want some for easily organizing lots of pages in a quick and easy manner. They don't all want to have forums, user profiles, galleries, news, or blogs built into the system.
Keep it simple, stupid.
Not a surprise, but why not a wiki? (Score:4, Insightful)
If you want KISS & need to add a lot of content, what is lacking in wikis?
Re:Not a surprise, but why not a wiki? (Score:3, Insightful)
I've been in the same boat as the guy you're replying to, and my answer to this question would have been that what I really wanted was something structured and designed more like the typical CMS implementation (database-backed, web-based admin without any html coding experience needed on the users' part, "document" upload of word/pdf/etc with searches and categories and all that, etc...), but I just don't want "community" features like blogging, news, rss, etc...
The usual answer that I've taken is to use o
One downside to Wikis (Score:3, Interesting)
I've used Scoop, Drupal, and built a couple of custom lite-CMS solutions. My only experience with Wikis is installing MediaWiki. To me the biggest downside was support for inserting straight HTML.
While you can insert HTML into a Wiki entry, it isn't recommended. They want you to use the Wiki tagging language. This makes sense because the Wiki tagging is used to convey useful meta-information and separate content from presentation, but at the same time, losing the ability to use all of the functionality
Re:One downside to Wikis (Score:3, Interesting)
These seem to be a bit incosistent, no?! Inserting straight HTML can be a security risk and/or wouldn't be used by non-savvy users. There are wikis that do and don't let you use HTML, so I don't know what the big deal is...
The best you can do without something
Re:Not a surprise, but why not a wiki? (Score:3, Informative)
A blog is definitely not a CMS. A true CMS has certain [bris.ac.uk] features [cmsreview.com], such as content "versioning" and support for workflow.
To the contrary, many CMS's are evolving in precisely this direction. Increasingly, they are improving their user interfaces (UI) so that the CMS UI becomes, in effec
Re:Not a surprise, but why not a wiki? (Score:2)
Ah the irony. The second link you list cites a blog as a type of CMS. Furthermore, I was using the term "blog" in a rather broader sense than personal blogs (though software that powers these, such as wordpress, are most definitely CMS apps): to refer instead to sites like slashdot.
I didn't say none. And I also see a d
Etomite is the answer (Score:1)
It is PHP/MySQL based, has very flexible templating features, and allows easy customization using snippets (small bits of PHP) and or chunks (small bits of straight html). It also sports a nice WYSIWIG editor.
It doesn't have a lot in the way of community features, like messageboards and such, but it is perfect for organizing content. You can have any number of users generatin
Re:Community V. Content (Score:1)
Magnolia [magnolia.info] - just released version 2, Java-based, fantastic content element dialog creation.
Etomite [etomite.org] - I am using this currently for a medium-sized business site. Nice addition of HTMLarea, still missing a few features but has the brightest future of the PHP CMSs.
Bricolage [bricolage.cc] - the only open-source CMS I have seen that will publish, that is, the CMS server is completely seperate from the web server, which is how it should be. Has great content ele
Re:Community V. Content (Score:3, Insightful)
You talk about the KISS principle... the problem is that there are two extremes:
and the easiest to write and implement are the slash and *nuke-like blogging systems. When a blog is all you want, these may also be the easiest to install and configure.
However, you can easily outgrow these as you may want to h
Re:Community V. Content (Score:2)
However I can say that one product that stands out, and I have seen used successfully, is Bricolage (http://www.bricolage.cc/) which is on the flexible side of the above spectrum.
Bricolage is built on top of HTML::Mason [masonhq.com], which is also the basis for some huge sites (e.g., Amazon).
Mason isn't a CMS itself, but you can do pretty much anything you can imagine with it. There are some other CMSs built on Mason that might be worth a look, however, including Mason-CM [itassistance.biz] and Bricks [sourceforge.net].
Mason can also be used with
Re:Community V. Content (Score:2)
I am going to assume that you meant to write "community" rather than "content" in the quoted text. If so, then I agree with your comment, and have elaborated on this issue before. [slashdot.org] There
Re:Community V. Content (Score:1)
Re:Community V. Content (Score:2)
Yes, quite a lot. I have been using it since Jan., 2003, nearly two years.
I am not sure that OpenCMS (version 5.01, the current production release) can publish pages via FTP, but at least one open source CMS has this feature built-in: Bricolage [bricolage.cc], which is designed for use by newspapers and magazines. Brico
Re:Community V. Content (Score:1)
Not really a help... (Score:3, Interesting)
my site is small enough, with few enough participants that i can get by writing my own; it just provides a web frontend for editing the text files directly. this directory [phism.org] has the source code... if anyone is interested
Re:Not really a help... (Score:1)
I had a look at a lot of systems when I was setting up a Debian Administration [debian-adm...ration.org] site.
All I wanted was the ability for some users to post articles, which had to go through a moderator or two - and the ability for comments to be posted.
Slash was too heavy-weight and most of the other systems didn't fit.
I ended up hacking yawns [freshmeat.net] to do the job for me.
I may revisit the choice later, but there's a big gap between slash and the less featureful systems which could be usefully filled.
Re:Not really a help... (Score:1)
Re:Not really a help... (Score:1)
Ahh to be clear I didn't write it, but I hacked my local copy.
As for sanitization, yes. I added a filter to strip out all HTML tags not explicitly allowed, using HTML::Scrubber [debian.org]./p
Typo3 rules them all (Score:4, Interesting)
They have freaking instructional videos for $DEITIES sake.
Marketing page:
http://www.typo3.com/ [typo3.com]
Community pages.
http://www.typo3.org/ [typo3.org]
smeat!
Re:Typo3 rules them all (Score:1)
Sorry about the second link, looks like the www subdomain is not set up for typo3.org.
Correct link:
http://typo3.org/ [typo3.org]
smeat!
Re:Typo3 rules them all (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Typo3 rules them all (Score:1)
You need video tutorials, e-learning is greatly improved by visual instructions. Also, for example, Plone's videos are not about using the CMS. They are mostly about extending the CMS.
(I could not see the typo3 videos, as the website doesn't work for me)
Ease of use (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Ease of use (Score:2)
I think (forthcoming accusations of suckuppitude expected) that Slashcode is a great forum management system.
[I'm at Excellent Karma but I still get modded down - that's what's good about it]
This is only worthwhile if one has a large enough user base, implementing user rankings does not work until a certain "tipping point" (to use an overused term) is reached.
Some bitch about Slashcode, but the thinking behind it is not so bad.
Try em yourself (Score:5, Informative)
plone (Score:1)
Depends on the exact purpose (Score:1)
The only trick is that it can take a while to install (I watched our poor Gentoo web-server grind away for a long time compiling and installing MySQL, Apache with the mods, and the updated mail client). However, there is a lot of documentation on customization and use.
Although, if you're not looking for the blogs and the multi-user thing, try somethin
Re:Depends on the exact purpose (Score:3, Insightful)
Checking documents in/out, versioning, etc
Slash, Nukes, etc.
I posted some of these thoughts here: http://ktd.sytes.net/index.php?p=26 [sytes.net]
What we wanted, was some ability for a portal (some blog like funcitoinality), but we wanted the best of both worlds from Wikis and Nukes. I wanted to flexable page orgaization
Open Source CMSs (Score:2, Insightful)
These days I am running xoops - no problems at all. It has the best installation among the 3.
Couldn't try others as they either wanted to install in directories like
I wanted to try som
Zope and Plone (Score:3, Insightful)
Zope is written in Python, so you avoid the PHP stack and its evils. Unlike PHP, Zope is designed around object-oriented concepts such as encapsulation.
For example, to interface with a database you typically create (again, through the web) a connection object, then an SQL method describing the data (a pure SQL script with a few special HTML-like tags for specifying parameter slots) and finally a page template which calls the method.
The upshot? You just decoupled the data from the presentation in a very elegant way, and you decoupled the data operators from the data source. Abstraction is the key.
Plone, in turn, abstracts much of Zope away to provide an elegant, extensible GUI for managing user-oriented content. It has a workflow system, a component system, WYSIWYG article editor support etc.
(The workflow system allows complex flows such as "both John and Jane must review and accept the article before it can be published, and after they've reviewed it, spelling wizard Bob must look over it before it for typos; but users Jack and Jill are trusted users who don't require John or Jane's approval to post articles.)
Unlike most other CMSes, Plone/Zope have no external dependencies -- no MySQL needed, for example.
Re:Zope and Plone (Score:3, Interesting)
This is really only a concern if the website's for your employer or a customer or something. If it's just for you, then I
Re:Zope and Plone (Score:1)
Re:Zope and Plone (Score:2, Interesting)
I note (from reading the Zope 3 book) that Zope itself is way more general than a content management system. Here is the quote:
Of course, I've only just started poking through the documentation and so forth, but so far, Zope as a technology reminds me ASP.net, only more abstract and general.
In response to c2
Re:Zope and Plone (Score:1)
Re:Zope and Plone (Score:2)
Get The Definitive Guide to Plone [apress.com] from Apress (Jun 2004).
Re:Zope and Plone (Score:2, Interesting)
Zope Pros:
- Built in everything: Webserver, ftp, webdav, gzip, caching.
- Great products: Plone, CMF, discussions, content types.
- Everything is an object. This sounds strange, but actually lends itself to the web very very well.
- Huge, active community. Tons of examples. Tons of sites.
Zope Cons:
- Documentation, while getting better, is not at the level of other solutions.
-
My experience: pMachine, Wordpress, MovableType (Score:4, Informative)
MovableType [moskalyuk.com] - fast to setup, easy to deploy, live community with hacks and what not around it, but since the move to the paid distro in 3.0 the activity died off a little bit. Never upgraded to the paid version, couldn't justify the license money with WordPress having so many similar features. It's a Perl+MySQL or Perl+flat file set up, so theoretically nothing more than cgi-bin is required.
Which brings us to WordPress [techinterviews.com] - extensible, lively community, very easy to install and setup. The engine itself is a bit immature at this point for some advanced stuff, but if you know PHP, you'll find your way around it. Has a link manager and mass edit for comments (very useful for spam treatment), extensible as far as design, not too modular though.
pMachine [itfacts.biz] - easy to set up, easy to use, but not too flexible. Coded in PHP and uses MySQL, many tweaks available, but limited functionality for the free version. The authors have since moved on to a different project, Expression Engine, and the community is a bit abandoned.
The above links are going to my sites which run the said engines, not the engines themselves, a simple google search would take you to download pages for the engines.
CMS mailing list (Score:4, Insightful)
Just my two cents on the subject.
PHPNuke (Score:1)
Re:PHPNuke (Score:1)
Try Plone (plone.org), a real standards based CMS.
Re:PHPNuke (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:PHPNuke (Score:3, Interesting)
Of the non-Nuke portals I would say that Drupal [drupal.org] seems to be one of the most well coded engines. Xaraya is also probably worth a look to but I have not used that one.
Re:PHPNuke (Score:3, Insightful)
Friends don't let friends use PHPNuke.
The people handling my church site wanted a PHP based solution, when I vetoed PHPNuke and its cousins for security issues, they suggested EzPublish. Their source code didn't look that icky (signs of some clue being present) - on my brief look at it. Yes I looked at PHPNuke's source code, and it was crap. I had actually looked at i
Don't install phpNuke (Score:4, Informative)
Once you get on the defacement lists, expect to get hit with every new 'sploit as soon as they're out. Francisco Burzi may be a nice guy, but he doesn't know shit about coding secure PHP. If you're going to run it, you'll at least need one of the secure releases or better yet...
Use drupal [drupal.org]. Very solid, safe, secure and easily configurable. The toughest bit is figuring out taxonomy or categories that the various entries (blogs, forum topics, stories, etc.) adhere to. These things are all 'nodes', btw. But once you have your categories down, you're done.
You can even search for a script [phrixus.net] to do the conversion from phpNuke to drupal, and no drupal doesn't require any special directories. Give it a whirl.
And if folks are whoring sites, then I'll whore mine.
Brew-Masters [brew-masters.com]
I have the throttle hooked up, so hopefully it won't get slashdotted, but then it doesn't look like this thread is getting a lot of comments.
Quick Summary (Score:4, Informative)
Here's a quick summary.
First of all you can check out a live version of almost all of the CMS at opensourcecms [opensourcecms.com]. This is a very good place to start.
First of all what do you want?
The main types are:
* Portals - Think slashdot + forum + gallery etc. * Wiki - Think wikipedia [wikipedia.org]
* Blogs - Need I say more.
* Groupware - Think Sourceforge.
For wikis the main one I like are:
* PmWiki for an easy to install persoanl wiki.
* Media Wiki for a large company wiki.
I don't do blogs so
I've tried a couple but none of them have really worked yet in my projects.
Portals
Re:Quick Summary (Score:2)
Tikiwiki [tikiwiki.org] tries to be all of this, and much more. And if the current feature list is not enough, just wait a few days/weeks for the 1.9 version (the site runs a recent cvs so most can be tried there).
Re:Quick Summary (Score:2)
I go to install a CGI (90% of which are perfectly fine) script and it requires a package. Fine lets use CPAN
Slashcode considered harmful (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Slashcode considered harmful (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Slashcode considered harmful (Score:1)
Re:Slashcode considered harmful (Score:2)
Slashdot main page [w3.org]
this discussion page [w3.org]
121 errors in the former, 111 in the latter. Nice.
Re:Slashcode considered harmful (Score:2)
If you want to run it through the validator, grab the HTML src and put it into the validator yourself.
Re:Slashcode considered harmful (Score:2)
Re:Slashcode considered harmful (Score:2)
Interesting (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Interesting (Score:2)
Re:Interesting (Score:1)
I tend to agree with this viewpoint. I did the same research for an upgrade to ZZZ Online [zzz.com.ru], but came up short. Typically, depending on the needs of the customer (even if it is yourself), are going to demand extensive changes to the code. Usually, this is enough to make you run screaming when the originators of whatever source you original used upgrades things due to "security concerns"
My suggestion is to download a bunch of different CMS systems and outline the functionality you really need most. If yo
Slashcode is pretty poorly represented. (Score:2, Funny)
Anyone out there have more expertise on the other CMS's want to double check this sites work?
Re:Slashcode is pretty poorly represented. (Score:2)
I'd take any of the reports on this site with a grain of salt and (as always) do a little of your own research before making any decisions.
Open source CMS (Score:1)
Re:Open source CMS (Score:2)
- you assign Squiz.net all copyrights to any modification you make (though I don't think that would stand up in court)
- you must notify Squiz.net of any modification you make
- the copyright licence has termination clauses
I'm pretty sure that it would fail a number of points of the OSD, and probably wouldn't be considered free software either.
Re:Open source CMS (Score:2)
"All your base are belong to us."
From your own kitchen is the best (Score:1, Funny)
Security -- many are poor at best (Score:3, Interesting)
Additionally, quite a few have a default data from the development site; you're getting a carbon copy of a site not an application. Wikis tend to be the biggest offenders. Twiki, for example, is a royal pain to configure from scratch if you want to start with a blank slate. Use the Twiki site data itself, and most of it seems to work...till you start to customize things...and it breaks again. Very annoying.
I'd treat them with a great deal of caution.
BeYourOwn.net -- Shameless Plug (Non-GPL) (Score:1)
http://www.beyourown.net [beyourown.net]
It's designed for and geared towards the newbie, but it's got all the features and power geeks demand.
It's not free, it's not open source, and it runs on Windows. But I'm a former Debian evangelist, so you can trust me (or not) when I say it's not evil. Take a look [beyourown.net], it's pretty cool, and it was created by myself and just a few of my friends so we'
Re:BeYourOwn.net -- Shameless Plug (Non-GPL) (Score:1)
We're also not totally proprietary - in that we'll be happy to give you the database schema, and any information you need to work with that data on your own terms, give you web services to work with, etc.
And although we're not open source a
Re:BeYourOwn.net -- Shameless Plug (Non-GPL) (Score:2)
The problem with current CMS systems (Score:1)
- A tree structure (so no nukealikes)
- WYSIWYG page editing (preferably with a nice interface to work with images)
- Easy templates (just a few files to edit rather than tens/hundreds of unclearly named ones)
- Easily configurable; no need to spend many hours studying documentation or tracking down host-specific details.
I have never seen a free CMS which does all
Re:The problem with current CMS systems (Score:1)
It breaks away from the nuke portal feel by having movable content blocks.
Re:The problem with current CMS systems (Score:2, Informative)
You should have tried Plone than. Of course, it's not PHP or Perl, but if you know these Python is at a difference of just one day of learning. It has everything you ask for:
Re:The problem with current CMS systems (Score:2, Funny)
Secondly, if you can ignore WYSIWYG (please, what is 'preview' mode for?) then check out drupal [drupal.org]. Small, tight, easy to configure, treelike structure. You'll spend more time trying to figure out your categories than you will doing other crap to get it rocking.
Themes are light and largely CSS based.
Re:The problem with current CMS systems (Score:1)
Re:The problem with current CMS systems (Score:1)
The very reason for WYSIWYG editors is so you don't have to constantly hit the preview button. And for the non-techies (you know, the people who provide the content on most non-techy sites) WYSIWYG is a LOT easier than HTML or similar tags.
Re:The problem with current CMS systems (Score:1)
Re:The problem with current CMS systems (Score:1)
Re:The problem with current CMS systems (Score:1)
Zope and Plone (Score:1, Redundant)
Plone is a product on top of Zope that provides something a bit more CMS-like, offering very flexible workflows, custom object types, etc. It is easily 'skinnable' meaning with very little work you can change Plone to look very different (e.g. www.warwickshire.police.uk).
Plone uses a system called Archetypes that allows you to rapidly deve
Re:Zope and Plone (Score:2)
MySQL, PHP, XUL (Score:2)
Try eZ publish CMS (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Try eZ publish CMS (Score:3, Insightful)
Once you get your head round the templating language, there's very little you can't achieve with it.
Re:Try eZ publish CMS (Score:2)
e107 (Score:2)
I've been using it since before it got big and have gone through many updates, which are easily executed with php update installation scripts.
It also
What are your projects *needs*? (Score:4, Informative)
We don't want to have users "logging in" to our company website. We don't need/want forums/blogs/galleries. We need a simple-to-use content-provider interface for people with little-to-no webskills. We want separate servers for development, testing and production. We have a very skilled set of admins, but they don't want to be tweaking the system every day.
Based on our evaluation period, we believe we are going forward with Bricolage [bricolage.cc]. It is not an easy system to get into, but its power and flexibility is fantastic and it has a fairly supportive community.
Use PHPBB and PHPBB Fetch All (Score:1)
phpBB mod? (Score:1)
That is rather than integrating phpBB into the CMS like some of the popular ones I've seen. I'd like to use my existing phpBB templates, user accoutns, etc.
Cheers
HyperContent (Score:2)
HyperContent [sourceforge.net]
It is being developed by various higher ed institutions and it has some real-world production use (not just a guy and and his website).
Perl Plone alternative (Score:3, Interesting)
I agree with all the comments about Plone [plone.org] being great, if Plone existed before we started developing MKDoc [mkdoc.org] then we probably wouldn't have bothered... If you like Plone but want a CMS written in Perl [perl.org] then check out MKDoc.
MKDoc doesn't yet have such a big community around it yet but it's only just been GPL'ed [mkdoc.org]...
The PHP CMS's are great if you don't have root, if you do then the Zope, Perl and Java ones are worth checking out.
Another one that hasn't been mentioned here is Java Mir [indymedia.org] the Indymedia [indymedia.org] CMS.
commercial ones are better at the moment (Score:4, Insightful)
This requires expertise and technical solutions. We provide both. Most of our customers do not actually care about what the software is or how it works. They just give us specifications and expect a working site that they can add content to effortlessly: that's what they pay us for. They neither have the expertise nor the desire to hand tailor some OSS system. License cost compared to development cost is negligable so most cost conscious customers will gladly cough up the license fees if they are convinced that it will cut down the total cost, especially if a nice support contract is bundled.
Often we find that a customer is actually using some tailor made system (sometimes based on OSS components). Usually the reason they are coming to us is the lack of flexibility, soaring maintenance cost of their existing software.
Blindfold and a pin (Score:1)
Re:Blindfold and a pin (Score:1)
Re:Blindfold and a pin (Score:1)
Besides, when they haven't thrown out the rowdy likes of me, there's not much chance they won't welcome you
Thank you, everyone (Score:1)
In the end, I went with Drupal. I like the clean code. I like the community. But also the decision was helped in part