In regards to the current Apache CMS, which we are currently using are: No one knows how to use it. No it's not that complicated, and yes we can learn it. But it's just one more hurdle for new developers. The wiki language doesn't seem to have the ability to create tables, or other common HTML type things. You have to resort to HTML code. I am not certain how flexible the layout engine is. I am envisioning wanting to create a developer's guide, which would have a substantially differently layout than the main site for example. I am not certain how easy it is to embed rich content like video without resorting to raw HTML. At least in Chrome, there are several bugs in the editor itself.
Granted, I have only really scratched the surface of how the CMS works, but as a new user, these were some of my first impressions. They could also be a result of me just not being familiar with the tool. ~Michael On Sep 2, 2011, at 7:41 AM, Upayavira wrote: > My first question would be: what is wrong with the Apache CMS? It's back > end isn't pretty (volunteers accepted to make it pretty), but it allows > for the site to be edited via a UI and via command line/SVN. > > The main requirement that Apache places upon its websites is that the > site is served as static HTML, and ideally with the generated HTML > stored in SVN for speedy recovery. Apache currently serves its websites > from one host (with a warm backup on a different continent), and this > typically rules out a lot of common CMS systems. > > So, to reiterate, are you using the Apache CMS, and if so, in what ways > does it lack? > > Upayavira > > On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 07:20 -0700, "Michael MacFadden" > <michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: >> All, >> >> There has been several threads on the usefulness of the current wave web >> site, the lack of consolidated information, and the feasibility of >> maintaining the current site. I would like to get some ideas on the >> infrastructure we should use to maintain the site. I strongly believe >> that we will have more luck maintaing the site if we use some technology >> that is easy to use, well understood, and that can create a rich site >> that is "easy" to maintain. >> >> I think whatever technology we choose should meet the following >> requirements: >> >> It MUST support an arbitrary layout. We should be able to design >> whatever layout we feel is effective. >> It MUST support a reasonable set of HTML constructs, things like images, >> tables, rich content (video), etc. >> It MUST be able to support revisions (i.e. versioning). >> It MUST have some sort of visual editor. >> It MUST support CSS for styling. >> >> It SHOULD have some ability to tie user accounts and permissions to your >> Apache account. >> It SHOULD a common technology with a wide user base and good >> documentation. >> >> >> Basically, I feel like for a project that represents a web-based >> technology, it is important for us to have a good looking, easily >> updatable, and usable web site. After all if we can't present a well >> designed and good looking web site, then how can users have confidence >> that we can build an advanced web based collaboration platform. There >> are many things out there like Joomla, Drupal, Wordpress, etc that would >> probably fit the bill. So I have a few questions. >> >> What do we want to use? >> What are we "allowed" to use within the apache infrastructure? >> If we want to use something like a open source CMS, how do we go about >> doing that? >> >> If we get any kind of consensus, I volunteer to get that infrastructure >> in place. Thanks ahead of time for your feedback. >> >> >> ~Michael
