Re: [libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMS - Prototype or demo?

Hi Marc, Ben, all,

Marc Paré schrieb:
> Le 2010-10-25 09:20, Benjamin Horst a écrit :
> > On Oct 25, 2010, at 7:52 AM, Bernhard Dippold wrote:

The following wasn't written by me, but by Marc ;-)
> > > > I don't think that a demo should have all of the features active
> > > > when it
> > > > was thrown together in so little time. It is not work messing up your
> > > > server space with potential hacking.
> > >
> > > As mentioned earlier, the problem derives from calling the testing
> > > area "demo". If it had been called "minimal version to start with"
> > > all these necessary functions would have probably been included from
> > > the beginning.
> > > > Common sense will show that missing functions can be included.
> > >
> > > Common sense shows, that nearly every function can be included in
> > > Drupal. But it *has to be* included to start working with the CMS.
> > >
> > > And time is too short to discuss the features - we have to start
> > > creating websites with whatever CMS will have been chosen.
> >
> > It feels like we're on a slippery slope here, with some folks thinking
> > we're still in demo phase, and others thinking we're already starting
> > a prototype phase. Let's just draw a line in the sand and choose one
> > or the other, and make it explicit so that everyone in this discussion
> > is on the same page.

A "demo" can only "demonstrate" what is included. If I remember 
Christian's first mail right, he asked for a "working demo" to try out 
how the features are working, where might be problems and what is easier 
to use for the non-techy webpage editor.

This is a prototype in my eyes - and with the time restrictions I think 
it should be even more: A system that is easily to be switched to the 
live website.

But let's hear what Christian meant - and perhaps what André is heading for.
> > > Until the decision of the Steering Committee there is still the
> > > chance to include the modules in the Drupal "demo". This would give
> > > the SC a real possibility to decide:
> > > In my eyes allowing the people waiting for the starting shot to
> > > create their webpages *now* is the main precondition for their
> > > decision. What I read from Christian's mails this is still not
> > > possible for Drupal, so there might be no real decision...
> > >
> > > I created a new table on the wiki page comparing only the necessities
> > > for going live with either Drupal or SilverStripe.
> > >
> > > http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Website/Evaluation_of_CMS_Platforms#Preconditions_to_go_live_with_one_of_the_CMS
> > >
> > >
> > > I didn't test these features in both of the CMS as I don't have the
> > > time ATM. I just added, what I remember from the discussion here.
> > >
> > > Please update the table with your experiences.
> >
> > It appears there is a "yes" for everything for Drupal here, and almost
> > everything for SS.

Did you extend already the list with the features Christian missed in 
Drupal?

I had a quick search in his mails and got:

Workflow system (request for publication and checked by others)
Comparison of different revisions (I only see "revert" and "delete")
Insertion of tables

Have these all been included by now? I can't find them in the Drupal demo.

Others have been added (enabling headers, links for example).

The module able to take care of changed internal links seems not to be 
installed by now ...

I'll add these points to the wiki.

>> [...]
> I would go even further and say that we should just cool things down,
> wait for the official SC answer --- a sort of freeze.

I would not wait for a decision at the moment: With not properly working 
demo/prototype Drupal will not have any chance IMHO.

And as the Drupal proponents can't include the already mentioned parts 
and bits in their demo, this might shed a bad light on their 
intention/ability to include them later on.

I want Drupal to be considered as real alternative to SilverStripe, but 
with these drawbacks can't be fair. I'm not able to do these 
improvements to Drupal (neither in time nor in skills), so I'll have to 
leave it to people with more experience in this field.

> If Drupal is
> picked, we have an abundance of committed webmaster help and training
> help and it will be put together quite quickly. I don't think we will be
> serving any purpose by spending time filling out pages on a "potential
> website" only to have that work nullified by a pick for the opposing CMS.

If it really takes so much time to have these conditions integrated in 
Drupal, we should stay with SilverStripe.

Christian set up a demo where people already try to build the pages they 
would need in future. If Drupal proponents don't think that a working 
demo is worthwhile to convince Christian and the SC about the ability of 
their CMS to allow webpages creation *now*, I can't do anything more...
> The SC gave us till the end of the week and even hinted that we were not
> progressing fast enough.

Right - and nobody seems to work on the topic any more.
> So, we should all take a breath and relax.

... with Drupal demo still lacking some of the most important 
features... :-(

> A couple of extra days delay will not kill the project.

No - but if these days are not considered to be important to close the 
gap between SilverStripe and Drupal, they are really wasted...
> We could take some time to register a members page on the Wiki so that
> we are easily identified.[...]

Of course - it's good to know who we are. I already created my user page 
in the wiki:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:Bedipp

A wiki page where all the active members of this mailing list are listed 
is a good idea - but less important than the CMS decision IMHO.

Best regards

Bernhard

--
E-mail to website+help@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted