On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Andrea Veri av@gnome.org wrote:
The point now is: which kind of software should the main website use if the decision would be to give it a new look. Well, IMHO the best solution at the moment would be to use drupal, it's easy to use and it has anything needed to make a website rocking. (I've also been using it for a while and I can tell drupal is a great CMS software)
Not wanting to chase you away, this is probably best discussed on centos-devel. There have been discussions and also a test machine for getting the forums out of the main website (php-bb seemed the way to go for that at the moment), because that has to be done before website redesign.
There hasn't been a real discussion or decision on which software the main website should run on. Preferrably something which can be "updated" easily, even more preferrably if it can be done so via package management.
The second point would be to setup a test istance with a CMS software on it to start working on the new website. (unfortunately i don't have any machine or host handy to run it)
That is where we can step in. At least a vm is possible.
But as said, this discussion should happen on the centos-devel mailing list, I'll crosspost this mail there.
Regards,
Ralph
On 01/28/2011 10:43 AM, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Andrea Veriav@gnome.org wrote:
The point now is: which kind of software should the main website use if the decision would be to give it a new look. Well, IMHO the best solution at the moment would be to use drupal, it's easy to use and it has anything needed to make a website rocking. (I've also been using it for a while and I can tell drupal is a great CMS software)
Not wanting to chase you away, this is probably best discussed on centos-devel. There have been discussions and also a test machine for getting the forums out of the main website (php-bb seemed the way to go for that at the moment), because that has to be done before website redesign.
There hasn't been a real discussion or decision on which software the main website should run on. Preferrably something which can be "updated" easily, even more preferrably if it can be done so via package management.
I think that Drupal is a good idea, it can be updated with yum as it is included in EPEL 5 and 6 [1][2] (we can setup a CentOS specific repo with the additional modules), also Drupal include a very usable forum (maybe a little basic).
The real problem is the migration of the current CentOS website and forum (I think is XOOPS based) to Drupal, here is some tips [3]
Regards.
[1] http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/epel/5/SRPMS/repoview/drupal6.html
[2] http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/epel/6/SRPMS/repoview/drupal6.html
[3] http://drupal.org/node/63796
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Athmane Madjoudj athmanem@gmail.com wrote:
The real problem is the migration of the current CentOS website and forum (I think is XOOPS based) to Drupal, here is some tips [3]
I guess web site migration isn't important (I'd really start with fresh content), of course things like banners from sponsors have to been taken into account.
Regarding the forums: There already has been work done in php-bb. You'll probably find mails in the list archives.
Ralph
Il giorno 28/gen/2011, alle ore 12.09, Ralph Angenendt ha scritto:
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Athmane Madjoudj athmanem@gmail.com wrote:
The real problem is the migration of the current CentOS website and forum (I think is XOOPS based) to Drupal, here is some tips [3]
I guess web site migration isn't important (I'd really start with fresh content), of course things like banners from sponsors have to been taken into account.
absolutely +1 to start from fresh content to avoid any issue now and in the future. As said in the post above, drupal do have a forum module available and as reported drupal6 packages are available already on EPEL5/6. (drupal6 is what we use at the Fedora's Insight Team as well)
Ralph, do you think you can take care of having a VM set up with a drupal istance installed through the packaging system? (basic setup then we might need to install some modules, here what we use at the insight team [1] and what would be nice to have installed on the vm as well)
Andrea
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Insight_customizations_to_Drupal#General_chan...
On 01/28/2011 11:25 AM, Andrea Veri wrote:
absolutely +1 to start from fresh content to avoid any issue now and
I'm not sure about the fresh content thing. Atleast the base, the comments and urls that get traffic now need to be retained. Part of it might be a large redirect pool, but whatever.
in the future. As said in the post above, drupal do have a forum module available and as reported drupal6 packages are available already on EPEL5/6. (drupal6 is what we use at the Fedora's Insight Team as well)
Last time we looked the drupal forum software was quite basic, and the phpbb integration was into a phpbb snapshot; not the rolling codebase distributed by phpbb.
Ralph, do you think you can take care of having a VM set up with a drupal istance installed through the packaging system? (basic setup then we might need to install some modules, here what we use at the insight team [1] and what would be nice to have installed on the vm as well)
There have been other people who were interested in getting involved with the website ver2 process, I'd really like to see them get involved. Am happy to do some pings around.
- KB
Am 28.01.11 12:28, schrieb Karanbir Singh:
On 01/28/2011 11:25 AM, Andrea Veri wrote:
absolutely +1 to start from fresh content to avoid any issue now and
I'm not sure about the fresh content thing. Atleast the base, the comments and urls that get traffic now need to be retained. Part of it might be a large redirect pool, but whatever.
Most content on the page (by comments I don't think you are talking about the forums?) is from the CentOS 4 and very early 5 days. I don't think there's that much in there which really needs to be retained. Much has been rewritten for the wiki. And I am really against having the old software running alongside something new.
Maybe we need to really look hard at the page to see what has to be moved over a new version.
Things I see are the mirror lists and the sponsor banners.
Ralph
On 01/28/2011 12:09 PM, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Athmane Madjoudjathmanem@gmail.com wrote:
The real problem is the migration of the current CentOS website and forum (I think is XOOPS based) to Drupal, here is some tips [3]
I guess web site migration isn't important (I'd really start with fresh content), of course things like banners from sponsors have to been taken into account.
Regarding the forums: There already has been work done in php-bb. You'll probably find mails in the list archives.
Ok, then we need to setup a CentOS specific repo for Drupal with some modules (that depend on the needs of CentOS webmasters) and phpBB, to make update easier.
We can use SRPMS from Fedora/EPEL or RPMForge as a base (phpBB is not available in RPMForge nor in Fedora/EPEL so we need to start a new SPEC for RPM).
Also which version of Drupal should we use ? 6.x (require php 4.4+) or 7.x (require php 5.2+)
RPMFroge:
http://packages.sw.be/drupal6/
EPEL: http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/epel/5/SRPMS/drupal6-6.19-1.el5.src.rp...
Regards.
On 01/28/2011 11:29 AM, Athmane Madjoudj wrote:
Ok, then we need to setup a CentOS specific repo for Drupal with some modules (that depend on the needs of CentOS webmasters) and phpBB, to make update easier.
Whats wrong with typo3 ?
Is the decision here for Drupal being made on the basis of 'we know drupal' or is it a case of 'drupal is the best option'. I dont see arguments being made either way.
- KB
Il giorno 28/gen/2011, alle ore 12.29, Karanbir Singh ha scritto:
On 01/28/2011 11:29 AM, Athmane Madjoudj wrote:
Ok, then we need to setup a CentOS specific repo for Drupal with some modules (that depend on the needs of CentOS webmasters) and phpBB, to make update easier.
Whats wrong with typo3 ?
Is the decision here for Drupal being made on the basis of 'we know drupal' or is it a case of 'drupal is the best option'. I dont see arguments being made either way.
for me it is a case of 'we know drupal'. I've been using it for some time now plus I'm working on another drupal istance for the Fedora insight team. (and we are making up some nice docs about the installation process and the modules needed etc.)
Andrea
Dear Andrea (and the other new faces showing up :)).
On 01/28/2011 11:29 AM, Athmane Madjoudj wrote:
Ok, then we need to setup a CentOS specific repo for Drupal with some modules (that depend on the needs of CentOS webmasters) and phpBB, to make update easier.
Whats wrong with typo3 ?
Is the decision here for Drupal being made on the basis of 'we know drupal' or is it a case of 'drupal is the best option'. I dont see arguments being made either way.
for me it is a case of 'we know drupal'. I've been using it for some time now plus I'm working on another drupal istance for the Fedora insight team. (and we are making up some nice docs about the installation process and the modules needed etc.)
First thanks for beeing interested in the WebsiteV2 project. I would like to invite you to take a look at the following wiki pages:
http://wiki.centos.org/WebsiteVer2/forums http://wiki.centos.org/WebsiteVer2/UnifyAuthentication
This is what we have already done:
http://wiki.centos.org/WebsiteVer2/forums/newbb_to_phpbb
Now we are in need of a little user management frontend to let ppl register their accounts to the LDAP servers.
This would also be possible with existing solutions, e.g. with a CMS that is capable of LDAP user management.
Depending of your skills, please either evaluate LDAP capabilities of common CMS systems or help us coding a user creation frontend.
Kind Regards Marcus
Il giorno 28/gen/2011, alle ore 14.18, Marcus Moeller ha scritto:
First thanks for beeing interested in the WebsiteV2 project. I would like to invite you to take a look at the following wiki pages:
http://wiki.centos.org/WebsiteVer2/forums http://wiki.centos.org/WebsiteVer2/UnifyAuthentication
This is what we have already done:
http://wiki.centos.org/WebsiteVer2/forums/newbb_to_phpbb
Now we are in need of a little user management frontend to let ppl register their accounts to the LDAP servers.
This would also be possible with existing solutions, e.g. with a CMS that is capable of LDAP user management.
Depending of your skills, please either evaluate LDAP capabilities of common CMS systems or help us coding a user creation frontend.
I do know that drupal got ldap support. As said before we use it to run the Fedora's Insight team website. (permissions and users are located into the FAS system, which is an ldap interface in the end)
Have a look at http://drupal.org/project/ldap_integration, i guess this is what we are looking for since starting to code a new ldap interface won't be that easy. (we use mango in GNOME for this duty [1])
cheers,
Joomla 1.6 supports LDAP authentication.
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Marcus Moeller marcus.moeller@gmx.chwrote:
Dear Andrea (and the other new faces showing up :)).
On 01/28/2011 11:29 AM, Athmane Madjoudj wrote:
Ok, then we need to setup a CentOS specific repo for Drupal with some modules (that depend on the needs of CentOS webmasters) and phpBB, to make update easier.
Whats wrong with typo3 ?
Is the decision here for Drupal being made on the basis of 'we know drupal' or is it a case of 'drupal is the best option'. I dont see arguments being made either way.
for me it is a case of 'we know drupal'. I've been using it for some time
now
plus I'm working on another drupal istance for the Fedora insight team.
(and
we are making up some nice docs about the installation process and the
modules
needed etc.)
First thanks for beeing interested in the WebsiteV2 project. I would like to invite you to take a look at the following wiki pages:
http://wiki.centos.org/WebsiteVer2/forums http://wiki.centos.org/WebsiteVer2/UnifyAuthentication
This is what we have already done:
http://wiki.centos.org/WebsiteVer2/forums/newbb_to_phpbb
Now we are in need of a little user management frontend to let ppl register their accounts to the LDAP servers.
This would also be possible with existing solutions, e.g. with a CMS that is capable of LDAP user management.
Depending of your skills, please either evaluate LDAP capabilities of common CMS systems or help us coding a user creation frontend.
Kind Regards Marcus _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On 01/28/2011 02:18 PM, Marcus Moeller wrote:
Dear Andrea (and the other new faces showing up :)).
On 01/28/2011 11:29 AM, Athmane Madjoudj wrote:
Ok, then we need to setup a CentOS specific repo for Drupal with some modules (that depend on the needs of CentOS webmasters) and phpBB, to make update easier.
Whats wrong with typo3 ?
Is the decision here for Drupal being made on the basis of 'we know drupal' or is it a case of 'drupal is the best option'. I dont see arguments being made either way.
for me it is a case of 'we know drupal'. I've been using it for some time now plus I'm working on another drupal istance for the Fedora insight team. (and we are making up some nice docs about the installation process and the modules needed etc.)
First thanks for beeing interested in the WebsiteV2 project. I would like to invite you to take a look at the following wiki pages:
http://wiki.centos.org/WebsiteVer2/forums http://wiki.centos.org/WebsiteVer2/UnifyAuthentication
This is what we have already done:
http://wiki.centos.org/WebsiteVer2/forums/newbb_to_phpbb
Now we are in need of a little user management frontend to let ppl register their accounts to the LDAP servers.
This would also be possible with existing solutions, e.g. with a CMS that is capable of LDAP user management.
Depending of your skills, please either evaluate LDAP capabilities of common CMS systems or help us coding a user creation frontend.
IMHO, LDAP authentication is better in case when ifra-team needs to deploy a new web app (eg: Bugzilla, Asterisk (VoIP) etc...).
Most of modern web app are compatible with LDAP auth directly or through an extensions.
Drupal already has LDAP integration modules [1] for LDAP authentication and groups, also there is other module [2] for user registration process that create the same user in LDAP servers and Drupal users tables.
I've never deployed a such solution however I'll try this scenarios in a CentOS VM, It'll take some time because I'm not very familiar with LDAP servers (both OpenLDAP and 389/Fedora Directory Server)
[1] http://drupal.org/project/ldap_integration [2] http://drupal.org/project/ldap_provisioning
Regards.
Andrea Veri wrote on 01/28/2011 06:37 AM: ...
for me it is a case of 'we know drupal'. I've been using it for some time now plus I'm working on another drupal istance for the Fedora insight team. (and we are making up some nice docs about the installation process and the modules needed etc.)
Andrea,
That seems to me to be a valid argument. If someone is willing to step up and devote substantial time to making Website 2.0 a reality, then their desire to work within a familiar environment should carry a lot of weight.
There has been a fair amount of discussion on the forum part of the new website. As a forum moderator, my primary concerns are:
1. A relatively seamless transition from the old site to the new, preserving both content and internal links to the greatest extent possible, and migrating existing active accounts.
2. A robust forum implementation, with ease of use being more important than features.
3. A mechanism for registering new users that locks out the spambots that have plagued the forum. Individual spammers we can handle with relative ease. The bogus accounts by the thousands are much more of a drain on resources.
Similar concerns apply to the Wiki - Seamless migration of existing content, and an easy path for contributors to continue their work, while preventing bad guys from doing damage.
Phil
Il 29/01/11 05.18, Phil Schaffner ha scritto:
Andrea,
That seems to me to be a valid argument. If someone is willing to step up and devote substantial time to making Website 2.0 a reality, then their desire to work within a familiar environment should carry a lot of weight.
you rock, thanks!
There has been a fair amount of discussion on the forum part of the new website. As a forum moderator, my primary concerns are:
- A relatively seamless transition from the old site to the new,
preserving both content and internal links to the greatest extent possible, and migrating existing active accounts.
- A robust forum implementation, with ease of use being more important
than features.
- A mechanism for registering new users that locks out the spambots
that have plagued the forum. Individual spammers we can handle with relative ease. The bogus accounts by the thousands are much more of a drain on resources.
I saw a lot of efforts have been made about this on the wiki and the plan, as far as I see it on the wiki page in question [1], is about to migrate Xoops+CBB(newbb) to phpBB. (which is a forum software which seems to meet all the requirements you kindly posted above here)
So, definitely yes, everything from users to posts must be preserved while migrating to the new platform. Feel free to let me know if i can help you with something else.
Similar concerns apply to the Wiki - Seamless migration of existing content, and an easy path for contributors to continue their work, while preventing bad guys from doing damage.
I guess the wiki won't be touched at first time since it is hosted on its own domain and it is just linked to the website. Anyway it will have to be centralized to the main LDAP istance, but there are some handy guides around. [2]
[1] http://wiki.centos.org/WebsiteVer2/forums/newbb_to_phpbb [2] http://moinmo.in/MoinMoinQuestions/Authentication#How_do_I_integrate_LDAP_au...
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:18:52PM -0500, Phil Schaffner wrote:
- A robust forum implementation, with ease of use being more important
than features.
I would really like to see something more like http://unix.stackexchange.com and less like a BB-style web forum.
On 29/01/11 22:30, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:18:52PM -0500, Phil Schaffner wrote:
- A robust forum implementation, with ease of use being more important
than features.
I would really like to see something more like http://unix.stackexchange.com and less like a BB-style web forum.
We have already been through the process of asking forum users what *they* want, and that feedback has been fed into the process here:
http://wiki.centos.org/WebsiteVer2/forums
Please, lets not throw away all the work we've already done.
Ned Slider wrote on 01/30/2011 06:06 AM:
We have already been through the process of asking forum users what *they* want, and that feedback has been fed into the process here:
http://wiki.centos.org/WebsiteVer2/forums
Please, lets not throw away all the work we've already done.
Agree, and should have pointed to that as background for my comments.
Phil
On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 11:06 +0000, Ned Slider wrote:
On 29/01/11 22:30, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:18:52PM -0500, Phil Schaffner wrote:
- A robust forum implementation, with ease of use being more important
than features.
I would really like to see something more like http://unix.stackexchange.com and less like a BB-style web forum.
We have already been through the process of asking forum users what *they* want, and that feedback has been fed into the process here:
http://wiki.centos.org/WebsiteVer2/forums
Please, lets not throw away all the work we've already done.
As I have stated in my previous mails, the work that has been done over the past years about this topic will be kept as the base for the work we are starting.
Contributors spent time and forces to have some of the things done, so past work won't be thrown away!
Andrea
On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 11:06 +0000, Ned Slider wrote:
On 29/01/11 22:30, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:18:52PM -0500, Phil Schaffner wrote:
- A robust forum implementation, with ease of use being more important
than features.
I would really like to see something more like http://unix.stackexchange.com and less like a BB-style web forum.
We have already been through the process of asking forum users what *they* want, and that feedback has been fed into the process here:
http://wiki.centos.org/WebsiteVer2/forums
Please, lets not throw away all the work we've already done.
As I have stated in my previous mails, the work that has been done over the past years about this topic will be kept as the base for the work we are starting.
Contributors spent time and forces to have some of the things done, so past work won't be thrown away!
Andrea
On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 11:06:11AM +0000, Ned Slider wrote:
We have already been through the process of asking forum users what *they* want, and that feedback has been fed into the process here: http://wiki.centos.org/WebsiteVer2/forums Please, lets not throw away all the work we've already done.
What with never being a forum user, I've never seen that. Of course if you ask forum users what forums they want, you'll get "oooh, forums!". :-/
Am 29.01.11 05:18, schrieb Phil Schaffner:
- A relatively seamless transition from the old site to the new,
preserving both content and internal links to the greatest extent possible, and migrating existing active accounts.
Internal links meaning links to already existing forum posts? That could be quite hard to maintain (although yes, it would be great).
- A mechanism for registering new users that locks out the spambots
that have plagued the forum. Individual spammers we can handle with relative ease. The bogus accounts by the thousands are much more of a drain on resources.
Yes. Especially as not all of them can be weeded out via database access easily, either. We did that with lots of accounts, but that didn't really help in the long run.
Similar concerns apply to the Wiki - Seamless migration of existing content, and an easy path for contributors to continue their work, while preventing bad guys from doing damage.
I really wouldn't touch the wiki stuff, except of upgrading to a new version, maybe, once I can figure out a *working* way to do that. The moin migration scripts aren't that hot.
Ralph
Ralph Angenendt wrote on 01/30/2011 12:41 PM:
Am 29.01.11 05:18, schrieb Phil Schaffner:
- A relatively seamless transition from the old site to the new,
preserving both content and internal links to the greatest extent possible, and migrating existing active accounts.
Internal links meaning links to already existing forum posts? That could be quite hard to maintain (although yes, it would be great).
Understood.
- A mechanism for registering new users that locks out the spambots
that have plagued the forum. Individual spammers we can handle with relative ease. The bogus accounts by the thousands are much more of a drain on resources.
Yes. Especially as not all of them can be weeded out via database access easily, either. We did that with lots of accounts, but that didn't really help in the long run.
I was thinking of using some mechanism like captcha - not perfect, as I understand that it can sometimes be defeated by a sophisticated bot. but would probably help a lot.
Similar concerns apply to the Wiki - Seamless migration of existing content, and an easy path for contributors to continue their work, while preventing bad guys from doing damage.
I really wouldn't touch the wiki stuff, except of upgrading to a new version, maybe, once I can figure out a *working* way to do that. The moin migration scripts aren't that hot.
My misunderstanding there - thought a new Wiki was being contemplated as well.
Phil
Am 31.01.11 19:07, schrieb Phil Schaffner:
Ralph Angenendt wrote on 01/30/2011 12:41 PM:
Yes. Especially as not all of them can be weeded out via database access easily, either. We did that with lots of accounts, but that didn't really help in the long run.
I was thinking of using some mechanism like captcha - not perfect, as I understand that it can sometimes be defeated by a sophisticated bot. but would probably help a lot.
I've looked into a sane solution for xoops and only found plugins which you needed for a) comments, b) forums, c) ... - so every place you could enter information has its own captcha :/
A real integrated solution needs the newest xoops installation (if that is out of beta now).
Similar concerns apply to the Wiki - Seamless migration of existing content, and an easy path for contributors to continue their work, while preventing bad guys from doing damage.
I really wouldn't touch the wiki stuff, except of upgrading to a new version, maybe, once I can figure out a *working* way to do that. The moin migration scripts aren't that hot.
My misunderstanding there - thought a new Wiki was being contemplated as well.
No, just maybe getting wiki accounts into LDAP as well. Although the user names on there are completely different.
Cheers,
Ralph
On 01/28/2011 12:29 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 01/28/2011 11:29 AM, Athmane Madjoudj wrote:
Ok, then we need to setup a CentOS specific repo for Drupal with some modules (that depend on the needs of CentOS webmasters) and phpBB, to make update easier.
Whats wrong with typo3 ?
Is the decision here for Drupal being made on the basis of 'we know drupal' or is it a case of 'drupal is the best option'. I dont see arguments being made either way.
Typo3 is more enterprise oriented (the same for: eZ publish),
Quote from Type3 website: (URL: http://typo3.org/about/new-to-typo3/)
"TYPO3 is a very huge and capable system and it cannot be fully learned in a week! TYPO3 will always have a long learning curve for developers."
IMHO, Drupal is easier to use and maintain for a community website, the other alternative can be Joomla!.
Regards.
On 01/28/2011 11:47 AM, Athmane Madjoudj wrote:
"TYPO3 is a very huge and capable system and it cannot be fully learned in a week! TYPO3 will always have a long learning curve for developers."
IMHO, Drupal is easier to use and maintain for a community website, the other alternative can be Joomla!.
having 'developed' with both of them, I'd argue that Drupal is harder to learn to use as a 'developed' site, contains more moving parts and has a higher maintenance curve.
on the other hands, there's RoR and django...
have you guys looked at the website ver2 page on the wiki ? There was some effort put into doing the 'what goes into the website' and 'what goes into the wiki'. If that distinction is vague, revisiting early is worth it
- KB
Joomla +1.
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 6:49 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.orgwrote:
On 01/28/2011 11:47 AM, Athmane Madjoudj wrote:
"TYPO3 is a very huge and capable system and it cannot be fully learned in a week! TYPO3 will always have a long learning curve for developers."
IMHO, Drupal is easier to use and maintain for a community website, the other alternative can be Joomla!.
having 'developed' with both of them, I'd argue that Drupal is harder to learn to use as a 'developed' site, contains more moving parts and has a higher maintenance curve.
on the other hands, there's RoR and django...
have you guys looked at the website ver2 page on the wiki ? There was some effort put into doing the 'what goes into the website' and 'what goes into the wiki'. If that distinction is vague, revisiting early is worth it
- KB
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
Am 28.01.11 12:47, schrieb Athmane Madjoudj:
Typo3 is more enterprise oriented (the same for: eZ publish),
Quote from Type3 website: (URL: http://typo3.org/about/new-to-typo3/)
"TYPO3 is a very huge and capable system and it cannot be fully learned in a week! TYPO3 will always have a long learning curve for developers."
IMHO, Drupal is easier to use and maintain for a community website, the other alternative can be Joomla!.
Both known for regular security issues (that's why I want to have software which is updated through packaged channels - we do have the same problem with xoops).
Ah and yes: If someone wants to suggest that - xoops is out :)
Ralph
On 01/30/2011 06:57 PM, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
Am 28.01.11 12:47, schrieb Athmane Madjoudj:
Typo3 is more enterprise oriented (the same for: eZ publish),
Quote from Type3 website: (URL: http://typo3.org/about/new-to-typo3/)
"TYPO3 is a very huge and capable system and it cannot be fully learned in a week! TYPO3 will always have a long learning curve for developers."
IMHO, Drupal is easier to use and maintain for a community website, the other alternative can be Joomla!.
Both known for regular security issues (that's why I want to have software which is updated through packaged channels - we do have the same problem with xoops).
Ah and yes: If someone wants to suggest that - xoops is out :)
IMHO, we should first begin with migration of the forum (xoops bb -> phpBB), make a theme for phpBB (I like much more the centos wiki theme) and then think about CMS (or web framework) for website.
Also I've noticed that the website is modified once per new CentOS release, so it's possible to drop CMS requirement and use plain HTML/CSS/JS(jquery ...), AFAIK other distro website (Fedora, openSuSE) run like that.
http://www.opensuse.org/en/ http://fedoraproject.org/
PS.
Hat off to the graphic design of the centos wiki.
Regards.
On 30/01/11 18:25, Athmane Madjoudj wrote:
On 01/30/2011 06:57 PM, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
Am 28.01.11 12:47, schrieb Athmane Madjoudj:
Typo3 is more enterprise oriented (the same for: eZ publish),
Quote from Type3 website: (URL: http://typo3.org/about/new-to-typo3/)
"TYPO3 is a very huge and capable system and it cannot be fully learned in a week! TYPO3 will always have a long learning curve for developers."
IMHO, Drupal is easier to use and maintain for a community website, the other alternative can be Joomla!.
Both known for regular security issues (that's why I want to have software which is updated through packaged channels - we do have the same problem with xoops).
Ah and yes: If someone wants to suggest that - xoops is out :)
IMHO, we should first begin with migration of the forum (xoops bb -> phpBB), make a theme for phpBB (I like much more the centos wiki theme) and then think about CMS (or web framework) for website.
Also I've noticed that the website is modified once per new CentOS release, so it's possible to drop CMS requirement and use plain HTML/CSS/JS(jquery ...), AFAIK other distro website (Fedora, openSuSE) run like that.
+100 to that.
To me it is fairly evident that the website content isn't maintained on any sort of regular basis hence the current rot. The website might as well be a (fairly) static landing site pointing to things like downloads of the latest release, the Wiki, the forums, the mailing lists, the IRC channels etc where the active community actually resides. IMHO the Wiki largely replaces the need for any CMS.
On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 19:48 +0000, Ned Slider wrote:
+100 to that.
To me it is fairly evident that the website content isn't maintained on any sort of regular basis hence the current rot. The website might as well be a (fairly) static landing site pointing to things like downloads of the latest release, the Wiki, the forums, the mailing lists, the IRC channels etc where the active community actually resides. IMHO the Wiki largely replaces the need for any CMS.
I'm starting to give more and more importance to this idea. Also we can easily maintain such website through a git repository where contributors can push the changes directly to the code preventing any issue with LDAP and cms-ldap integration.
The combos static website (HTML/CSS etc), phpbb and the existing wiki / mailing lists can make a clean and nice alternative to our original idea of setting up a cms.
Andrea
Hi all.
+100 to that.
To me it is fairly evident that the website content isn't maintained on any sort of regular basis hence the current rot. The website might as well be a (fairly) static landing site pointing to things like downloads of the latest release, the Wiki, the forums, the mailing lists, the IRC channels etc where the active community actually resides. IMHO the Wiki largely replaces the need for any CMS.
I'm starting to give more and more importance to this idea. Also we can easily maintain such website through a git repository where contributors can push the changes directly to the code preventing any issue with LDAP and cms-ldap integration.
The combos static website (HTML/CSS etc), phpbb and the existing wiki / mailing lists can make a clean and nice alternative to our original idea of setting up a cms.
But again leads to the demand of a LDAP user management solution.
Greets Marcus
Hi Guys,
On 01/31/2011 07:48 AM, Marcus Moeller wrote:
But again leads to the demand of a LDAP user management solution.
Fairly central to all this is the content split document. Since Marcus, Ralph and I are going to be at Fosdem - Ralph suggested a short face2face session. Lets see if we can come up with a draft proposal for the content split between the wiki and the website.
At the moment, I just see more and more of the RubyOnRails platform being the one to shoot for on www.c.o :)
- KB
Karanbir Singh writes:
Hi Guys,
On 01/31/2011 07:48 AM, Marcus Moeller wrote:
But again leads to the demand of a LDAP user management solution.
Fairly central to all this is the content split document. Since Marcus, Ralph and I are going to be at Fosdem - Ralph suggested a short face2face session. Lets see if we can come up with a draft proposal for the content split between the wiki and the website.
At the moment, I just see more and more of the RubyOnRails platform being the one to shoot for on www.c.o :)
Eugh :) Any specific software?
-- Nux! www.nux.ro
On 01/31/2011 05:09 PM, nux@li.nux.ro wrote:
At the moment, I just see more and more of the RubyOnRails platform being the one to shoot for on www.c.o :)
Eugh :) Any specific software?
Not entirely sure as to what you mean by that.
- KB
Karanbir Singh writes:
On 01/31/2011 05:09 PM, nux@li.nux.ro wrote:
At the moment, I just see more and more of the RubyOnRails platform being the one to shoot for on www.c.o :)
Eugh :) Any specific software?
Not entirely sure as to what you mean by that.
Are you looking at a specific RoR project (cms etc) or you're planning to build custom stuff?
Am 30.01.11 20:48, schrieb Ned Slider:
To me it is fairly evident that the website content isn't maintained on any sort of regular basis hence the current rot.
This is a problem with the software. If you only occasionally change things, you have to learn all over again each time :)
I'd still like to have a news section of some sorts. Or a "run in" of the twitter feed or planet.centos.org.
xoops is just too complex to achieve things like that easily. The CMS from hell, so to say.
Ralph
Am 30.01.11 19:25, schrieb Athmane Madjoudj:
Also I've noticed that the website is modified once per new CentOS release, so it's possible to drop CMS requirement and use plain HTML/CSS/JS(jquery ...), AFAIK other distro website (Fedora, openSuSE) run like that.
One of the reasons that it is updated so rarely is xoops. There's more content which should/could go there (are we at some event? are there other interesting news?), but that hideous piece of software stands in the way :)
Hat off to the graphic design of the centos wiki.
Say thanks to Alain, he sometimes reads here.
Regards,
Ralph
Athmane Madjoudj writes:
I think that Drupal is a good idea, it can be updated with yum as it is included in EPEL 5 and 6 [1][2] (we can setup a CentOS specific repo with the additional modules), also Drupal include a very usable forum (maybe a little basic).
The real problem is the migration of the current CentOS website and forum (I think is XOOPS based) to Drupal, here is some tips [3]
+1 for Drupal, but v7 not v6. Maybe someone can package v7 as well for EPEL.
-- Nux! www.nux.ro
On 1/28/2011 5:13 AM, Athmane Madjoudj wrote:
On 01/28/2011 10:43 AM, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Andrea Veriav@gnome.org wrote:
The point now is: which kind of software should the main website use if the decision would be to give it a new look. Well, IMHO the best solution at the moment would be to use drupal, it's easy to use and it has anything needed to make a website rocking. (I've also been using it for a while and I can tell drupal is a great CMS software)
Not wanting to chase you away, this is probably best discussed on centos-devel. There have been discussions and also a test machine for getting the forums out of the main website (php-bb seemed the way to go for that at the moment), because that has to be done before website redesign.
There hasn't been a real discussion or decision on which software the main website should run on. Preferrably something which can be "updated" easily, even more preferrably if it can be done so via package management.
I think that Drupal is a good idea, it can be updated with yum as it is included in EPEL 5 and 6 [1][2] (we can setup a CentOS specific repo with the additional modules), also Drupal include a very usable forum (maybe a little basic).
The real problem is the migration of the current CentOS website and forum (I think is XOOPS based) to Drupal, here is some tips [3]
Regards.
[1] http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/epel/5/SRPMS/repoview/drupal6.html
[2] http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/epel/6/SRPMS/repoview/drupal6.html
actually drupal can keep itself much more updated with it's internal scripts than a third party repo is going to do.
Il giorno 28/gen/2011, alle ore 10.43, Ralph Angenendt ha scritto:
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Andrea Veri av@gnome.org wrote:
The point now is: which kind of software should the main website use if the decision would be to give it a new look. Well, IMHO the best solution at the moment would be to use drupal, it's easy to use and it has anything needed to make a website rocking. (I've also been using it for a while and I can tell drupal is a great CMS software)
Not wanting to chase you away, this is probably best discussed on centos-devel. There have been discussions and also a test machine for getting the forums out of the main website (php-bb seemed the way to go for that at the moment), because that has to be done before website redesign.
I've subscribed to this m-l as well. Anyway I see no point in waiting to have this done since an eventual website redesign won't take a day and not even a week. Forum transfer and website redesign can be done at the same time IMHO.
There hasn't been a real discussion or decision on which software the main website should run on. Preferrably something which can be "updated" easily, even more preferrably if it can be done so via package management.
I don't know what is the drupal or phpbb packages status in CentOS, so I think this will be your call. I've proposed drupal which looks to me as the best solution to build a website using a cms atm. But up to you to decide and to check package's status on repositories.
That is where we can step in. At least a vm is possible.
sure. A vm is more than enough.
Andrea
On 1/28/2011 4:43 AM, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Andrea Veriav@gnome.org wrote:
The point now is: which kind of software should the main website use if the decision would be to give it a new look. Well, IMHO the best solution at the moment would be to use drupal, it's easy to use and it has anything needed to make a website rocking. (I've also been using it for a while and I can tell drupal is a great CMS software)
Not wanting to chase you away, this is probably best discussed on centos-devel. There have been discussions and also a test machine for getting the forums out of the main website (php-bb seemed the way to go for that at the moment), because that has to be done before website redesign.
There hasn't been a real discussion or decision on which software the main website should run on. Preferrably something which can be "updated" easily, even more preferrably if it can be done so via package management.
The second point would be to setup a test istance with a CMS software on it to start working on the new website. (unfortunately i don't have any machine or host handy to run it)
That is where we can step in. At least a vm is possible.
But as said, this discussion should happen on the centos-devel mailing list, I'll crosspost this mail there.
Regards,
Ralph _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
drupal is far from easy in terms of setup. Once you get it setup though then it's not too bad. You don't have to use another package for the forums as drupal has some built in as well as several modules as well. This means we don't have to have yet another package to maintain and setup(phpbb isn't that easy either). I would move the entire website to the same package instead of splitting it and generating more administrative overhead.
Wordpress is an option as is joomla and e107.
-
Andrea Veri -
Athmane Madjoudj -
Karanbir Singh -
Marcus Moeller -
Matthew Miller -
Ned Slider -
nux＠li.nux.ro -
Phil Schaffner -
Philippe Laurent -
Ralph Angenendt -
William Warren