I'm sorry I think I misunderstood Greg's needs and you might've misunderstood (or I didn't explain myself properly) a little.
Radiant right now, in spite of all of its merits it still is in its infancy (performance-, feature- and support-wise). I wouldn't want Radiant to YAOCMS.
It has its own place, use and personality, if you will. However, you must admit that much work still needs to be done to work out the features that it DOES have and some features that would definitely be helpful from the administrative perspective. No, I don't want Forums, XML aggregators, polls, classifieds, banner rotators, etc. I'd simply would like:
* A more graphical (not necessarily WYSIWYG) editor so that those people who write content can enter it themselves w/o needing to know HTML, Textile, Markdown or any other mark-up language.
* A roles based content entry...don't want a casual collaborator to have the same level of access than, say, a developer or an admin or a regular collaborator.
* Comments/Feedback system. (which I beleive was mentioned in the presentation @ RubyCon).
* Category management.
I know some of this can be (relatively) easily implemented, but the fact is that they're as yet not there. I know the merits (and dismerits) of Drupal, Joomla! and Typo3...I simply suggested them based on my perception that this site was fairly large and highly dynamic. At any rate, the point is that there are already a quadrazillion (an actual number: a four followed by a bizillion zeros) very competnt CMS's that can even walk your dog and I wouldn't like Radiant become just one more. However, some added features would enhance the experience of what it does do and what it does best. JMO.
Peace,
Ruben
On 10/27/06, Greg Farries <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Erik Mallinson wrote:
> I disagree with Ruben - the point of Radiant isn't to mature to be
> like Drupal, Joomla! or Typo3; the point of Radiant is that it's
> mature to exercise restraint. Radiant is for small groups of people
> to manage a straight forward site.
Well, in terms of Maple Leaf Web, we have a very small team of
writers/editors. Including the following
Admin (myself)
Senior Editor (4)
Managing Editor (1)
Content Manager (2)
Writers (4)
The Senior editors, and writers won't even need access to the CMS, only
myself, the managing editor and the content manager need to be able to
add/edit content. So I think this definitely falls into the small
team/group class.
> I think it depends on what you want. If you want to have the site
> feature the articles, Radiant is great for a site like that, (imho)
> better than Drupal. If you want to add polls, forums, and other
> community features, you should probably go with Drupal.
Essentially, all I need the CMS to do is manage the features we produce.
The Weblog, Forum, sections will all be controlled by third party software.
Weblog will use Wordpress, the forum will be PunBB.
> Why? Because Drupal was overkill. I spent most of the time
> turning off features and dealing with 'the way it is' than with the
> content itself.
I agree, and this is why I initally looked at using Wordpress. Wordpress is
almost what I need, as it doesn't complicate the process with a bunch of
features almost no one uses.
>
> So if you're going to keep the forums and polls separate I don't see
> why you couldn't use Radiant.
> _______________________________________________
> Radiant mailing list
> Post: [email protected]
> Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/
> Site: http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant
_______________________________________________
Radiant mailing list
Post: [email protected]
Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/
Site: http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant
_______________________________________________ Radiant mailing list Post: [email protected] Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/ Site: http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant
