Can I just say, how nice it is to read this thread and not see Microsoft 
SharePoint mentioned?

Have a great weekend,
//Ed

On Feb 14, 2014, at 3:14 PM, Cary Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:

> Random comments and crackpot remarks.
> 
> ---
> 
> I like to think of myself as a programer and architect, not a PHP developer 
> or a Python developer (Rails, JS, Scala, APL. Java, C/+/+...). In 2005, I was 
> either going to build a new CMS in ColdFusion or move to Django, when Drupal 
> presented itself as a possibility. I was no fan of PHP, and I was skeptical.
> 
> My first Drupal project was not a CMS. It was putting a user-freindly face on 
> a dSpace library. Drupal won me over because it had well documented APIs and 
> it was XML friendly. Drupal was written in PHP, but avoided the excesses of 
> that language by adopting strong coding standards. Even then, the community 
> was thinking of it as a content management framework.
> 
> Since then and across 5 major releases, Drupal has picked up thousands of 
> contributed modules, and, notably, moved to test-driven development. It has 
> kept its tight coding standards, and added tools to help developers maintain 
> those in their own modules.
> 
> Coming soon(ish): Drupal 8 we will be based on a framework. Symfony started 
> life as a "Rails for PHP" and has evolved into a movement. What Symfony and 
> Rails (and Drupal) have in common are passionate, dedicated communities. The 
> move to Symfony is expensive for the community, but we feel it is worth the 
> effort, as it will lower the entry bar for Drupal developers who have a 
> background in PHP, Symfony or even Rails and Rails-ish frameworks.
> 
> ---
> 
> As was pointed out earlier, the selling point for using a full-on CMS is 
> support and maintenance.
> 
> You can build the coolest, most specific site and/or CMS in the world in 
> Unlambda, Piet or Lolcode, but unless you have a dedicated amanuensis, or 
> perhaps your own reality TV show, whoever owns it had better have a really 
> good insurance policy on you, just in case you get hit by a truck before you 
> get to the documentation step. If they have both the insurance policy AND a 
> truck, watch out.
> 
> ---
> 
> I really like Python, but I seldom use it for anything other that 
> systems-related jobs. Day-to-day, I use Drupal (API-as-language), Symfony, 
> Node, and occasionally Rails. Java drags me in once in a while.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Cary
> 
> 
> On Feb 14, 2014, at 8:39 AM, Sarah Thorngate <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
>> I second Jason's approach. Even though I'd have more fun using a framework,
>> I'm currently implementing a CMS (Drupal) for our main site content. If
>> your non-technical library colleagues are anything like mine, they will
>> want LibGuides-level simplicity for editing content. My thinking is that
>> it's worth a little extra pain now to make sure I'm not the only one who
>> can make changes to our content in the future; that can be a huge time
>> suck, and prevent you from moving on to other projects.
>> 
>> Sarah
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 10:08 AM, Scott Turnbull <[email protected]
>>> wrote:
>> 
>>> We used Django and Python extensively while I was at Emory.
>>> 
>>> First let me answer your question.  If Django interests you then
>>> DjangoCMS is a pretty good choice https://www.django-cms.org/en/
>>> 
>>> I know a few folks who use it and like it quiet a bit.  That said I
>>> know a lot of the community is trending toward Flask for simple apps
>>> in python so it depends on how deep you want to go with what you need
>>> to develop.
>>> 
>>> In terms of what I'd add, I would reflect what a lot of people have
>>> already said here.  My own philosophy is that the CMS problem has
>>> already been solved and it's not a great fit for a custom framework
>>> unless you have very strong use cases that prove it isn't.   I suggest
>>> you consider taking care of straight up content with whatever CMS you
>>> want to use (Drupal, Wordpress, etc) and reserve Django and python for
>>> custom apps that need to sit under it.
>>> 
>>> You can theme the sites so they look the same, leave the CMS to the
>>> CMS and put your django apps under an app. subdomain to make the
>>> experience more ore less seamless.
>>> 
>>> Just my thoughts, I hope that helps some.
>>> 
>>> Good luck and let us know what you end up doing,
>>> 
>>> - Scott
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Jason Bengtson
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> I agree with Josh. In the end it's really going to come down to
>>> balancing priorities. On my personal site I don't use any kind of content
>>> management system and have no interest in adopting one. This has left me
>>> free to do as I please without jumping through hoops to try and get things
>>> work with an often intentionally limiting CMS. At my last University we
>>> started with nothing but moved institutionally to Cascade Server (a
>>> horrible mistake if ever there was one). Still, as rotten as CS is, I was
>>> able to shoehorn a lot of web code through various mechanisms and the
>>> campus web team simply kept all the good apps and such on an application
>>> server and linked to them as needed. Of course, that meant that the pages
>>> of the site itself were pretty static and standardized, in most cases, to
>>> the point of McDevelopment, but it also allowed departmental admins to make
>>> changes without knowing a stitch of web code. I was in  bad position there
>>> because I had little access to anything but t!
>>> he CMS, so I had to find ways to shoehorn web apps I built into the CMS
>>> and get them to work within its strictures. It didn't help that we had an
>>> upper leadership element that didn't understand the difference between a
>>> web page on our site and a purpose-built web app.
>>>> 
>>>> Here at RMB, we don't currently use a CMS, but my predecessor built
>>> what, in some ways, amounted to a kind of CMS for some of the content using
>>> ColdFusion. We're evaluating a move to a CMS to put broader content editing
>>> in the hands of departments so that they can take charge of more than news
>>> items and the addition of database links. We'll see how that goes. Needless
>>> to say, the good stuff will be kept far away from the CMS. The biggest
>>> advantage to that arrangement on the computing side is that someone coming
>>> in to replace me wouldn't really need to have an in-depth understanding of
>>> php (which is the main server-side script I use) to get a handle on the
>>> majority of the site. When I was hired I quickly discovered that it was
>>> fortunate I had some ColdFusion in my background, or a lot of what our site
>>> did and how it worked would have been inaccessible until I got up to speed
>>> on the language.
>>>> 
>>>> I guess what it comes down to for me, as we look at this decision, is
>>> how much CMS flexibility and tweakability I need for the main site, vs what
>>> I want in place for the real web apps that have been built or are underway
>>> (which I can locate separately and build using whatever framework I see
>>> fit). As such you may want to use Django as your framework on a separate
>>> application server, while employing a more normative CMS for most of your
>>> site content.
>>>> 
>>>> Hopefully at least some of that wasn't too trite.
>>>> 
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> 
>>>> Jason Bengtson, MLIS, MA
>>>> Head of Library Computing and Information Systems
>>>> Assistant Professor, Graduate College
>>>> Department of Health Sciences Library and Information Management
>>>> University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center
>>>> 405-271-2285, opt. 5
>>>> 405-271-3297 (fax)
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://library.ouhsc.edu
>>>> www.jasonbengtson.com
>>>> 
>>>> NOTICE:
>>>> This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it
>>> is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential
>>> or otherwise exempt from disclosure. If the reader of this e-mail is not
>>> the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering
>>> the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
>>> dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly
>>> prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please
>>> immediately notify us by replying to the original message at the listed
>>> email address. Thank You.
>>>> 
>>>> On Feb 14, 2014, at 8:30 AM, Joshua Welker <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> There are two conflicting issues here. If you want ease of development,
>>>>> you want a framework. If you want ease of content creation, you want a
>>>>> CMS. As a developer, it's always my preference to go for ease of
>>>>> development and use a framework. Designing plugins and modules just
>>> sucks.
>>>>> A simple plugin like displaying dates on a page is stupidly complicated
>>>>> when you have to integrate it with the entire CMS rendering engine. But
>>> I
>>>>> have to acknowledge that it is better for me as the developer to do a
>>>>> little extra legwork than requiring all the non-techie content creators
>>> to
>>>>> do the extra legwork. That said, it isn't _too_ hard to implement a
>>> basic
>>>>> wysiwyg editor like CKeditor in most frameworks that would eliminate
>>> much
>>>>> of the difficulty for content creators.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The bigger issue for me is that, when you use a framework, you more or
>>>>> less guarantee that anyone inheriting your code is going to be facing a
>>>>> steep learning curve, possibly insurmountable depending on their level
>>> of
>>>>> programming knowledge. With a CMS, there is built-in documentation and a
>>>>> support community for 95% of functionality, and then you just have to
>>>>> document the 5% or so of code that you custom wrote.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Having said all that, I have to point out the amazing Yii PHP framework.
>>>>> It is so extremely easy to build a data-driven app. If you ever want a
>>> PHP
>>>>> framework, use that. For Python, I'd go with Django just because it has
>>> a
>>>>> better support community and is slightly easier than Flask for database
>>>>> functionality like ORM.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Josh Welker
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
>>>>> Coral Sheldon-Hess
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2014 6:14 PM
>>>>> To: [email protected]
>>>>> Subject: [CODE4LIB] Python CMSs
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi, everyone!
>>>>> 
>>>>> I've gotten clearance to totally rewrite my library's website in the
>>>>> framework/CMS of my choice (pretty much :)). As I have said on numerous
>>>>> occasions, "If I can get paid to write Python, I want to do that!" So,
>>>>> after some discussion with my department head/sysadmin, we're leaning
>>>>> toward Django.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Here's a broad question, re: Python and Django: If you've made the
>>> switch,
>>>>> what has your experience been? Has Django (or any other Python
>>> framework)
>>>>> given you something cool that was lacking in your previous
>>>>> language/framework/CMS? Has it helped you build something awesome? Have
>>>>> you found it enabling or limiting in any way? If you were going to sell
>>>>> people on (or against) using it, what would your arguments be? I'm a
>>>>> relative newbie to Python, and a total newbie to Django, so even if
>>> there
>>>>> was a tutorial you found useful, or some caveat you learned along the
>>> way,
>>>>> I'm interested. :)
>>>>> 
>>>>> And then a more specific question: Given the following requirements, do
>>>>> you have a Django-based CMS you'd recommend? (Of course, I'll also do my
>>>>> own research, but I'd love to see what other libraries' experiences have
>>>>> been and what's popular, right now.)
>>>>> * There's a chance we'll want to offer other editors access to it, at
>>>>> some point, so it would be nice if I can provide a WYSIWYG interface,
>>>>> which I also am going to want the option to *turn off*, for my own
>>> sanity.
>>>>> * We're a Springshare-heavy library with Summon and big secret API-based
>>>>> plans, so easy JavaScript (preferably jQuery) integration is a must.
>>>>> * It should play nicely with MySQL.
>>>>> * Because I probably won't be here forever, it's of the utmost
>>> importance
>>>>> that whatever we end up with is easy to maintain.
>>>>> * I'm used to MODx's page-ID model, where I can move pages around, and
>>> as
>>>>> long as I don't delete/recreate a page (thereby changing its ID), I
>>> don't
>>>>> have to change any links anywhere else in the CMS. I'd really like
>>>>> something that will work equally well, since the odds that I'll nail the
>>>>> information architecture on the first try are probably slim. :) (Maybe
>>>>> this one should go without saying, since I know WordPress and many other
>>>>> CMSs do this, but if you have to err, err on the side of being explicit,
>>>>> right?)
>>>>> * A nice forms-builder plugin (module?) would be a great thing to have,
>>> as
>>>>> well. We use FormIt in MODx, and now I'm spoiled.
>>>>> 
>>>>> And, I mean, if there's a CMS on top of another Python framework you
>>> think
>>>>> I should be considering, feel free to throw that out as a possibility,
>>>>> too!
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thank you!
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Coral Sheldon-Hess
>>>>> http://sheldon-hess.org/coral
>>>>> @web_kunoichi
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Scott Turnbull
>>> APTrust Technical Lead
>>> [email protected]
>>> www.aptrust.org
>>> 678-379-9488
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> 
>> Sarah Thorngate
>> Digital Services Librarian
>> North Park University
>> [email protected]
>> 773-244-4562

Reply via email to