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

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


Christian,

> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Benjamin Horst <bhorst@mac.com> wrote:
>> 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:
>>
>> We're working on this, but again, it's not a one-person decision here.
>
> Yes, it's not. But those people who will make the decision should have
> something to compare. I fully agree here.
> But again: Who else but those who are advocating for a specific
> platform, those who tell they have experience with the system are more
> suited to setup a demo?
> Especially if everybody is telling that you need to put quite some
> time into configuring it until it fits all your needs?

Those who have said this were envisioning far more complex sites than I believe you were imagining. To replicate the current static site will not require a great deal of configuration whatsoever.

>> I don't think the onus is on everyone to prove to you personally that Drupal is best suited
>
> No, not to me personally. Me included, but not exclusively to me. So
> far only the ones that maintain a drupal site themselves are in favor
> or drupal, the users didn't really had a chance to make up their mind
> yet. (And those who were and tried out silverstripe, prefer
> silverstripe over the current drupal demo)

I think this is not a valid comparison, unfortunately, until after Keith shared full admin credentials to his demo late this afternoon (Tuesday). At that point, several people seemed more supportive of Drupal.

>> to the task; I think it's the reverse. If you're setting yourself up as the gatekeeper here,
>
> Kind of, since I won't blindly follow whomever shouts loudest.
> I'm active in the OOo community for the last ten years, so I consider
> myself as experienced community member, I have been active in the
> website project at OOo, am in the admin group taking care of the
> servers.

This is good, but you're not the only one who has been active this long. Further, new contributors can also provide fresh new ideas that should be weighed on their merits, not based on their newness to the project. Finally, at the moment, you seem to be shouting the loudest while covering your ears to my suggestions.

> But I'm surely not the only one who will make that decision. Again to
> stress it: It is the content editors/native-lang people basically
> who'll work with it, so it needs to be easy to use for /them/, not
> nice for the admin.
> If both is combined, the better, but if the UI for the user sucks,
> then sorry, you're out of the game.

I agree, but the Drupal UI is strong, so I don't see the problem.

>> then you need to be impartial and test both suggested platforms yourself.
>
> Test: Yes, I fully agree.
> Set it up myself and then having to face comments like you don't know
> it, you should have done it otherwise, install module xy and
> everythign works, etc.: No, thanks.

We're not in contention here. I will be happy to talk you through as much as I know without blaming you for not knowing what modules need to be enabled for which functionality. Or, better, we can simply work with Keith's demo now that he's shared the admin credentials with the list.

>> If you're setting yourself up as an advocate of one platform, then you cannot also be the person to make the final decision.
>
> But I can always defend my personal opinion. And honestly: That what I
> saw from the drupal demos doesn't kick it for me.
>
> It just doesn't fit the usecase of the website. (And I take the
> current OOo website as reference here, since I expect the organization
> and use to be very, very similar)

It fits the usecase of the website very well. Please explain what you think is missing?

>>>> 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:
>>
>> Silverstripe looks like a nice CMS, but not the best match for our requirements.
>
> Then please point out what it lacks for our requirements, what
> requirement you're talking about here.

See my next line.
>
>> For a large site supporting dynamic activities
>
> What do you mean with dynamic activities?

Allowing site members to create content, working groups, discussions and comments, and similar actions.
>
>> [...] since you are already biased toward one particular system and have not spent your time evenly evaluating the proposed alternative.
>
> Well, I'n not getting tired to write that I'll happily evaluate it,
> but that I'm not setting it up myself.
> I laid out the reasons for this multiple times.

You seem to have sufficient time to spend on this project. But we can work from Keith's demo going forward.

>> 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.
>
> Well, I don't see a problem with that. Once because I don't think that
> Silverstripe doesn't scale for the intended usage, and secondly: Even
> if it does, I see no problem in admitting the failure and to switch to
> another CMS.

None of us has seen this firsthand, that's why I am skeptical.

> That is exactly my argumentation why I'm not suitable to setup a
> drupal demo. No matter how much effort I'll put in, there *will* be
> someone who will complain afterwards: You could have done it better
> /that/ way. And I don't feel like that.

I don't think this will happen. Or, we'll just work from Keith's demo.

> I don't get why you ignore this aspect again and again and always
> claim that I'm not willing to evaluate it/not willing to consider it.

As I have said each time--I'm already working day and night and cannot find the time to do this. You seem to have the time, so I keep asking you to step in and help out. At the very least, you'll then have the perspective of working with two CMSs before making your decision. Would you buy the first car or house that you saw? Why the first CMS?

>> [...]
>> This conversation has been challenging, but I think it is important to start the LibreOffice
>> website on the best possible platform.
>
> As indicated otherwise: It is important to /start/.
> Even it it is not the best possible platform on earth. What counts is
> that it works.

Now that Keith's demo is available, please take another look using the admin credentials. It surely works.

Thanks,
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>
Re: [libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMSMarc Paré <marc@marcpare.com>
Re: [libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMSKeith Williams <kwilliams@thoughtfarmproductions.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>
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.