[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [libreoffice-website] CMS requirements / suitability testing


Hi Keith,

On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 5:51 AM, Keith Williams
<kwilliams@thoughtfarmproductions.com> wrote:
> [...]
> I would set out some tasks that the CMS will need to facilitate and judge
> from that.

See the start of the thread.

>  I also think that you will find that using Drupal's solr search
> and integrated commenting / discussion features will help to open up
> participation by people.

silverstripe has that as well, as shown on the Faq-page of the demo:
http://pumbaa.ooodev.org:7780/faq


Drupal might have a huge amount of extensions, a huge userbase and a
huge amount of followers, but as mentioned that doesn't matter to me.

Believe me:
I set up the mentioned guidelines/requiremente *before* looking for a
cms to try out myself, and not after playing with silverstripe.

And of course I visited pages like drupal and whatnot (used
wikipedia's overview as a starting point).

silverstripe was the first one where I could determine it would suite
my needs without spending hours on the corresponding website.

> Go to:
>
> http://api.drupal.org and see the documentation
>
> Check out the amount of documentation and information is available for
> configuring and managing Drupal.  Does silverstripe have the same?

Of course silverstipe has api documentation, (
http://api.silverstripe.org/ ) documentation on how to configure the
modules, support fora, etc.
by looking at the api site, the list of core modules is very short.
(i.e. those that are maintained by the core developers of
silverstripe). But the point is also that it doesn't need that much
documentation, that the new site doesn't need much more than that.

You guys always demand that you definitely must try drupal - but did
/*you*/ have a closer look at silverstripe yet?

> [..]
> Anyway,  I like Drupal obviously, but this isn't blind love.  If I found
> something that I could develop as fast with and not do boring forms and
> reports by hand then I'd look into it.

See - same for me. Found silverstripe. It does what I want it do, thus
I'm happy with it, and the urge to look out for alternative
significantly diminished.

Fullquote snipped. Please do inline quoting without fullquotes.

ciao
Christian

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail to website+help@libreoffice.org
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.

Follow-Ups:
Re: [libreoffice-website] CMS requirements / suitability testingKeith Williams <kwilliams@thoughtfarmproductions.com>
References:
[libreoffice-website] CMS requirements / suitability testingChristian Lohmaier <lohmaier+ooofuture@googlemail.com>
Re: [libreoffice-website] CMS requirements / suitability testing"jzacsh" <jzacsh@gmail.com>
Re: [libreoffice-website] CMS requirements / suitability testingBenjamin Horst <bhorst@mac.com>
Re: [libreoffice-website] CMS requirements / suitability testingChristian Lohmaier <lohmaier+ooofuture@googlemail.com>
Re: [libreoffice-website] CMS requirements / suitability testingBenjamin Horst <bhorst@mac.com>
Re: [libreoffice-website] CMS requirements / suitability testingChristian Lohmaier <lohmaier+ooofuture@googlemail.com>
Re: [libreoffice-website] CMS requirements / suitability testingBenjamin Horst <bhorst@mac.com>
Re: [libreoffice-website] CMS requirements / suitability testingChristian Lohmaier <lohmaier+ooofuture@googlemail.com>
Re: [libreoffice-website] CMS requirements / suitability testingBenjamin Horst <bhorst@mac.com>
Re: [libreoffice-website] CMS requirements / suitability testingKeith Williams <kwilliams@thoughtfarmproductions.com>
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.