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

Re: [libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMS



On Oct 18, 2010, at 5:19 PM, Christian Lohmaier wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 5:13 PM, Benjamin Horst <bhorst@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>> You had dropped off the discussion for the past several days, so I wasn't sure if you were still following.
>
> I thought I made it pretty clear that to judge, I want a demo that
> meets all the initial requirements.
> And people were telling: I'll create such a site. Thus I laid back and
> waited for the result.

We're working on this, but again, it's not a one-person decision here. I don't think the onus is on everyone to prove to you personally that Drupal is best suited to the task; I think it's the reverse. If you're setting yourself up as the gatekeeper here, then you need to be impartial and test both suggested platforms yourself. If you're setting yourself up as an advocate of one platform, then you cannot also be the person to make the final decision.

>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:42 AM, Christian Lohmaier wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Benjamin Horst <bhorst@mac.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> So I'm strongly in favor of silverstripe...
>>
>> However, I think you're the only one. :)
>
> No surprise.

I don't want to alienate you or make you feel uncomfortable, but I don't think you are taking the best approach in this situation. Silverstripe looks like a nice CMS, but not the best match for our requirements. For a smaller site built for a non-technical client, it seems to excel. For a large site supporting dynamic activities across the globe with a range of different types of content and uses, I think it does not match Drupal.

>> I've counted roughly 4-5 people who are in favor of Drupal, including Andrea Pescetti, who replied to
>> the thread at length on Oct 16. Please read Andrea's email because it includes very good points.
>
> I read all the mails in this thread, but just because Drupal has a big
> fanbase doesn't convice me to actually use it.

This cannot be a decision made by fiat--it must be a community decision. It cannot be your sole choice, since you are already biased toward one particular system and have not spent your time evenly evaluating the proposed alternative.

Turning your above statement around--just because you built a pretty demo in Silverstripe, does not mean that it will scale (in terms of functionality) to address the full site needs of LibreOffice. This is my single largest concern--if we start with Silverstripe, we may grow into its limitations pretty quickly. Then we have the unpleasant choice of replacing our CMS or just living uncomfortably with it. Inertia may well lead us to choose the second option, which could cripple our project in many small ways.

>> Silverstripe does not seem to offer the groupware functionality that Drupal can provide us
>
> Saiy who?
> I mean I selected silverstripe after thinking about the initial
> requirements, and I found it to comply with all of them.

I do not think the initial requirements were sufficiently reviewed by this community. Please, everyone take a look and provide your feedback on them here: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Website/Evaluation_of_CMS_Platforms
>
>> If I don't have time to install a complete Drupal demo site (because I have a demanding day job),
>> that is not a sufficient reason to run roughshod over the request by myself and other community
>> members to give it a fair review.
>
> You (all drupal fanboys/supporters) so far communicated the same about drupal.
> It can do anything if you just spend enough time configuring it properly.

"Fanboys" is generally considered a pejorative term. Please avoid it, to keep this conversation civil and focused on the technical issues. On topic: Drupal's vast flexibility will allow us to grow and add many new features to our site over time, some of which we don't anticipate right now. That flexibility is highly valuable.

> So yes: I demand *other* that are familiar with drupal to do it.

You cannot demand the community fit your mold, unless you are its boss. I believe we are organized as a team of volunteers that needs to operate by consensus (or at least by "approval voting"; someone may not be thrilled with a decision but agrees to abide by it).

>> Christian--you seem to have the time to install and test Silverstripe,
>
> Yes, because installing it didn't take long. It basically was ready
> right from the start.

This does not seem like sufficient "due diligence" to know definitively whether it suits our longterm needs.

>> but you refuse to install Drupal.
>
> Yes. Because their demos didn't convince me. It only tells: "You need
> to put a heck worth of work into customizing it/hunting for the
> appropriate plugins to get there where silverstipe is more or less
> out-of-the-box.

As a community, many of us are saying to you: "Drupal is a very powerful CMS that will fit our needs." We're not total strangers, and therefore our suggestion should carry much more weight than a demo that was put together by someone none of us knows. (I'm not referring to Keith's demo here, just the original one you looked at.) If you did not have us to converse with, maybe you could write off a CMS after looking at an online demo. But we're here and we're saying Drupal is good--that should be enough for you to take a second, very close look at it to see why we all think it's so great.

> And as also written a couple of times: As silverstipe fits my
> needs/the needs I did lay out (and nobody else added points to), why
> should I invest time in drupal?

Actually, I updated the wiki page here last week: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Website/Evaluation_of_CMS_Platforms

Others probably have more updates--please add them to this page!

> And as you mentioned the extension site running drupal: That is
> another point why I don't really want to consider it. A statement that
> swirls around in my head from the folks as OSUOSL (where that site is
> hosted) was that those sites are those that require most ressources.

Please contact them directly if you'd like. Perhaps they could join this thread and provide their input as well.

>> Why not go ahead and test it side-by-side, yourself?
>
> Because then you'll again state: But you didn't install module x/y
> that would have solved all your problems, because then you'll state:
> You should have had an expert install it, etc.

This would represent the iterative process we inevitably need to follow at some point to reach the best website we can build. So, let's begin to do so on the demo Keith set up: http://www.mywebclass.org/~bhorst/

This conversation has been challenging, but I think it is important to start the LibreOffice website on the best possible platform. I'm not willing to simply give up, for fear that we'll do less than our best collective work and implement a CMS system without having sufficiently analyzed our options.

-Ben

Benjamin Horst
bhorst@mac.com
646-464-2314 (Eastern)
www.solidoffice.com


--
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

Follow-Ups:
Re: [libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMSChristian Lohmaier <lohmaier+ooofuture@googlemail.com>
References:
[libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMS"Andre Schnabel" <Andre.Schnabel@gmx.net>
Re: [libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMSBenjamin Horst <bhorst@mac.com>
Re: [libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMSChristian Lohmaier <lohmaier+ooofuture@googlemail.com>
Re: [libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMSBenjamin Horst <bhorst@mac.com>
Re: [libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMSChristian Lohmaier <lohmaier+ooofuture@googlemail.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.