In particular, for your audience, one of the things that Radiant has
over Refinery is the power it gives the end user over the final
content.

For example, Refinery only allows 1 layout and it's controlled in
committing code to your repository and deploying changes. (unless this
has changed recently).

Radiant puts the control for editing layouts in the hands of the end
user (with appropriate rights) and allows you as many as you like.
There's an argument that you might actually want to limit access to
HTML code like that, but the benefit is that with Radiant, you get to
decide according to the project needs (by adding an extension to alter
the behavior).

I've used (and contributed to) extensions that get layout and snippet
code from the file system, but one of the big selling points is that
you can hire a developer to put together the site and hire some other
designer or developer to make changes to it later: you are free to
choose and control the output of your own site.

Total control of the output is there. While it's not necessarily
obvious, you can make your own RSS, Atom, XML, css, whatever type of
content and feed it out. Radiant doesn't care, whereas, Refinery just
spits out HTML (as far as I know).

I've got more points about why Radiant is great, but I'm curious about
what others have to say.

I don't know if the order you listed is what you're planning, but if
you're trying to convince people to try Radiant put the "why NOT"
before the "why". You want them to remember the "why".

The most common questions I get about Radiant are:
1) can i use it with my *existing* application?
2) why is it so difficult to get extensions working?
and now 3) when will it be on Rails 3

for #1 I just answered that here
http://groups.google.com/group/radiantcms/browse_thread/thread/b691cf9ab644a8b2
for #2 it's a generalization but most often its because some extension
developer has not updated the extension in 6 months (or something) or
the person asking the question didn't ask for help for what could be a
very minor (or major) compatibility problem.
That's on of the reason's why we're not just willy-nilly jumping into
Rails 3: because there is a very large user base and over 200
extensions in the registry and who knows how many existing websites
could break in some way without a considerate plan.


On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:58 PM, Joel Oliveira <joel.olive...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey everyone -
> Next month's Boston.rb meeting (Jul 12) -- http://bostonrb.org/ -- is going
> to be centered around two of the more popular Rails-based CMS's out there.
>  I'll be presenting on our dear Radiant (of course) and Refinery will be
> presented by fellow Boston rubyist, and all around awesome guy, Dan Pickett.
>  I'm not so much concerned with coming out on top as "king shh of rails cms
> mountain" (ok maybe a little bit) ... but want to be absolutely sure I act
> as a good ambassador for the Radiant project.  I have a few ideas for the
> points I'd like to touch on but figured I would open it up to the list to
> see if there are any specific things I should absolutely not miss.   In
> other words - help me make absolutely sure we come away with some converts.
>
> history
> installation / dependencies?
> the extensions system
> why choose Radiant?
> when NOT to choose Radiant
> road map
>
> If anyone has gone through the similar experience and noticed there were
> questions during/after about things you didn't expect - what would they be?
>
> Thanks for your input!
> - Joel



-- 
Jim Gay
Saturn Flyer LLC
http://www.saturnflyer.com
571-403-0338

Reply via email to