Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2010 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Le 2010-10-18 04:37, Andre Schnabel a écrit :

I see that there are lots of discussion, which CMS to use, what features
are needed ... at the other hand, users and language teams need more
info at our website - nad without the infrastructure in place we cannot
give more information.

The issue has been briefly discussed in the last SC-meeting and we
would ask you (the team here at the website list) to come up with a
proposal this week.

Please consider, that we will never find a solution that fits all and
we will see migrations of infrastrucure in the next year anyway.
So please help us to get a good start - but let us start.



Hi everyone

As you can see, the SC is giving us this week to figure out our choice of CMS.

Firstly, here are the specs (written up by Christian) that we informally agreed, unless we decide to add more to the list of specs.


[libreoffice-website] CMS requirements / suitability testing

Christian Lohmaier
Wed, 06 Oct 2010 23:39:10 -0700

Major points any CMS must fulfill:

* Create static pages
In the past, on the website with SourceCast (now named
CEE) we often had the problem of the site going down because of the
amount of requests. A pure php driven site, even with php-accelerators
very likely will put too much load on the server.

* User-Firendly URLs
People want to be able to guess what a link is about. Pointing someone
to http:://<randomnumber> is bad, better point to
Also important for search-engines and the like

* Support for Translations
Key pages should be available in multiple languages, the CMS should
support managing those (without having the editor keep the list of
translations in sync, without the editor needing to update all
translations with a new link)

* Support for subsites
As LO is a huge project, with lots of different areas where work is
being done, the CMS should support multiple subsites. (like for
example on OOo the various native-lang projects, the marketing,
distribution, etc. projects, that have different focus and needs)

* sufficiently sophisticated user-rights system
Not every user should have the possibility to change every aspect on the site. Some parts are reserved to be edited by admins, some areas are free to be messed-around by community members. Specifically, it should support a review/approval workflow.

* user friendly editor
Probably not so much of a concern, as many will use the same tinyMCE,
but nevertheless an important topic

Those are the basic requirements

Areas it does not need to provide:

* an own wiki
Specialized wiki-software is always superior

* own Forum
See wiki

* random other addition (blog, whatever)
see wiki / we have dedicated planet


Having now the specs., we have narrowed down the choice to Silverstripe and Drupal.

Here are the demo sites:

Silverstripes: -- advocated by Christian Lohmaier

Dupal: -- advocated by Keith Williams

From here we should first examine if both of these fill the basic requirements as laid out in the specs up above.


E-mail to for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.