On 26 Oct 2005, at 21:36, Marielle Lange wrote:
Drupal is cleanly designed with extensibility in mind and more
flexible. Drupal provides a standard high-level API for developing
extensions and making it easier to extend Drupal in a standard way
with uniform look-and-feel. Drupal provides better support for
internationalization through i18n module. Drupal has better support
of Search-Engine-Friendly URLs in core and through modules. Drupal
supports multiple sites with a single installation with fine-
grained access control and ability to selectively share
configuration settings and database tables. Drupal comes with
better templating system.
Sure Drupal is nice. There are a couple of projects I have been
partially involved with that use Drupal - no real complaints.
<http://www.flickr.com/photos/thox/24237747/> ... Drupal XUL
with XMLRPC. Anticipating the future, xul compatibility is
something very good to have.
Yes - not exactly live yet :) Also Drupal XMLRPC is a php file! -
drupal is written in python by the way. This is quite telling:
- http://trac.civicspacelabs.com/cgi-bin/trac.cgi/file/trunk/
modules/drupal.module
The XMLRPC library and Drupal being documented and maintained using
Trac! Basically Drupal is great for a kitchen sink community site,
but it is not a dedicated developer resource tool. We don't need all
the Drupal stuff - we need effective collaborative software
development tools integrated into Rev.
3) Code and binary stack versioning linked to wiki documentation
Drupal features content versioning. It also supports taxonomy
support (we will need this too, this will become more and more
important over the next 3 years).
Content versioning is not code versioning - most wiki's don't store
the full history, can loose historical data, and do not support
anything other than recent versions - no support for binary
versioning (ie stacks) and no branching etc
Additionally I have requirements to add the following:
1) Issue tracking (tickets) and milestone support
This means there is a main manager and a support service. Is this
realistic? If you propose support, you give users a reason to
expect it. Do we really want that (i.e., to end up doing
revolution's job)? Isn't open comments more appropriate?
No. Just an organised way for people to report problems and plan
their sub-projects - milestones etc. i can see people using it to
develop components they wish to release and possibly sell - a few
people would use this if it helps them cooperate with other
developers to achieve their goal - and is easier to use than setting
up something themselves.
Best is probably to install both and put them to the test for a
month and then check up what are their pros and cons (often you
discover annoyances only by experience).
Shall we move this to a small group discussion? (somewhere on a
wiki, with occasional reports on this list)
I would say not until there are more than 2 and a half of us :) Also
my guess is the discussion of wiki / web site integration with Rev is
not entirely off interest to the list - even if they don't fancy
actively supporting something that involves work yet :) Any request
we move the discussion elsewhere?
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
