Sorry, first paragraph should read its often far easier to do the latter than the former. My bad.
On Dec 5, 2013, at 8:19 PM, Jon Clausen <[email protected]> wrote: > > To answer your question, the major difference between customizing a CMS > versus incorporating your content management within a framework, IMHO, comes > *after* the site is built. That said, I think its often far easier to do the > former than the latter, as most CMS systems arent documented to be fully > customized but, instead are documented to develop against their own, limited, > plugin architecture. > > The customization of a standalone CMS almost always involves a heavy > forking of the distributed file system. Doing this breaks forward > compatibility and upgrades and simple security patches become complex > diff-merges that nearly always break your customizations. CMS customizations > also frequently involve customizations to the database, unless you attempt to > jump through many, many hoops to shoehorn the customizations in to the > existing conventions and database structure of the CMS. Once you start with > the forking of the database structure, upgrade headaches increase > exponentially. > > Building on a framework allows you to more effectively maintain the site over > the long-haul as, most often, you are swapping out a non-forked or > lightly-forked version for a newer one. Take for example, the Coldbox > framework. The ContentBox CMS is built as a module of the main framework, > with a module structure of its own which mirrors (and can be hooked-in to) > the main framework. This allows one to develop a robust application on the > core framework, while hooking in to the module of the CMS as required or > ignoring it when its not needed. > > I like CMS systems. They are a great tool for solving specific, mostly > basic, problems. They also tend to be well supported over the long-term as > there is a wide user base with a vested interest in keeping them going. Ive > got three major apps I still maintain that were developed on great frameworks > that died slowly and quietly. Thats one of the dangers to developing on > bleeding edge frameworks, but its one Ill take most of the time, if there > are specific needs that either arent addressed or are over-complicated by > attempting to customize the CMS. > > HTH, > Jon > > On Dec 5, 2013, at 6:41 PM, Nils <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Why would I choose a CF Framework over a CF CMS system? I have no real=0A= >> experience with either, other than installing both and playing around.=0A= >> If a CF CMS system such as Mura & speck already include a framework such=0A= >> as Coldbox, Model-glue FW/1. why not just go for a Mura type system? I=0A= >> understand there's a huge oversimplification in the question,: CMS is=0A= >> managing content and page, frameworks deal with data. But, in the end=0A= >> they both do the same in many ways. CMS includes an Framework?=0A= >> I need to build out an e-commerce system, of course a site with=0A= >> integrated blog and video and blah blah..=0A= >> Suggestion? ideas? >> -- >> -Nils >> The Computer Chief >> IT Solutions and Website Hosting >> >> >> >> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:357303 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/unsubscribe.cfm
