Web site CMS software evaluation
by adamWell, as we discussed, the list of free opensource content management systems (CMS) software is too extensive for anyone to evaluate in great detail.
I focussed my efforts on the five systems currently at the top of the running at packtpub’s competition.
- Drupal — (formerly Mambo) web reviews depict it as easy to use and considered good for community sites (what we are)
- e107 - seems less mature but promising
- Joomla! - looks good, web reviews consider it good, too.
- Plone - looks good, but can’t be installed with our current level of system access at igc, our current webhoster, so probably out. Bummer for me, because it’s based on Python, which I prefer.
- Xoops – looks good
There may be others worthy of greater consideration, and I am open to them.
Any of these CMS’s are worthy and probably would be ok. I am leaning towards Drupal right now. You can demo all of them for free at this free demo website.
You can google for things like xoops vs. drupal or e107 vs. joomla and spend the rest of your life evaluating these things.
Here’s what I see that makes me lean towards Drupal.
- There are a number of good reviews of it on the web by users who are happy and tried some of the others. You will find that everyone of these has its fans
- Like many of the others it has these features:
- mass email of users for email broadcasts, (in the optional advanced user module)
- forums,
- blogs for every user,
- web page publishing via a web page interface,
- numerous color and layout themes that can be chosen or modified as one wishes, all of them offer a number out of the box, and have more that their developer community has developed.
- it is considered a good system for community websites
- it seems more simple to use with less training
- a Wordpress conversion module, which will allow us to preserve the current Mont. Co. blog stuff.
- There is also a book function that allows a group of people to put together a series of pages that are related, I imagine this could be used either for various committees or for different counties.
- Each of these has things like feed aggregators, and news headline systems and user membership capabilities
- These seem to be most mature systems with the most mature (large) user communities and developers creating addins and helping each other to make these things work, give each other support, etc.
I’m sure that any of these CMS’s will work, my other leaders were Joomla, and maybe xoops. Joomla seems less good for novice users (us). Drupal seems better for communities (us).
All of these systems have additional parts (modules) that other people can write and add to the overall system, for example
I strongly recommend you look at the free demo website above, and see for yourself what these things look like. They are all good enough. My vote goes to Drupal right now unless someone finds something that looks like a showstopper.
We will need to see what the best way to handle counties is, and subsidiary webpages. It seems like if we offered each county their section within the CMS, it would increase the overall coherence of the website, and would make it easier for each of the counties to maintain their stuff, plus they would be able to take advantage of the new features. The web server hardware will not really handle each county installing their own CMS, so it is best if we do this once in a shared fashion. Also, it means that the data will be shared and linked appropriately throughout the site.
Regardless of which CMS we choose, we should continue to discuss the overall structure and layout and goals of the website. Perhaps establish some thoughts on what homepages look like and how to structure the menus to bring people into the website. We can do it right here.
Tim:
If the blog editing screen isn’t working for you, it is actually a function of your browser, not the blog…. You can flip back to the old style editor by unchecking the “Rich Visual Editor” checkbox in the user management screen. You have to do this yourself. You can flip it back if you want.
11 Responses to “Web site CMS software evaluation”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
October 12th, 2006 at 11:26 pm
Because I am the novice that I am, I will therefore second your reccomendation.
–N.B.
October 13th, 2006 at 9:16 am
There is a free online book about using Drupal at:
http://drupalbook.packtpub.com/
October 29th, 2006 at 1:22 pm
Brian sent me this email, and in continuing the notion that we will avoid repeating ourselves by conducting this discussion in public, I have put his comment below with my comments below in italics
adam
I agree, the portal systems I suggest are far more flexible than the blog systems.
I agree totally.
Agree.
Having been that webmaster for Montgomery County, I know how easy it is for such an arrangement to be a bottleneck, and appear as a hierarchy. Empower the users!
Here you are discussing the policies that should guide the content of some of the main pages on the site, as opposed to other areas that might be more open and discussion oriented.
I fully endorse the formation of such policies and would encourage the notion that the policies are separate from the publishing system which implements them. (Whether the system is a portal system, or a “system” of manually edited pages.) If the publishing system can’t support them, then it should be discarded. All the systems I have looked at support the creation of access control policies to extensive degrees.
Also, as Mont. Cty. webmaster, it has been interesting how little feedback I have received concerning what should or shouldn’t appear on the site. Generally, everyone has had the attitude of trusting each other’s judgement. I haven’t been involved in any of the state level disputes.
The hardest thing has been to get together and focus on creating such policies. Once they’re created I expect that nearly all the software that I evaluated would be relatively easy to use to implement the access controls to our satisfaction.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:57 pm
Hi from Will-
My feeling has grown stronger regarding the usage of blogs, because I support the main MD Greens site to be a top-level organizational structure where we describe our party, platform, objectives, candidates, initiatives, but I feel that informal conversation would distract from our message being communicated to our potential party members. We need to have a concise message as we have talked about and I just want to put my 2 cents in regarding a few other things.
Python should be available on any paid hosting server now days. If you are paying and they are not updating their server it might be wise to shop around for that while considering other major changes.
Lastly regarding the look, I really like the look that was first brought to our attention about a month ago when we talked about this on the phone. I felt that it should have a flower such as what’s on Robb Tuft’s campaign site (www.votetufts2006.com) which is a GP Template, but otherwise I thought the look was great. The content of Brian’s site was good but the look wasn’t modern.
Keep up the dialogue I am sure we will get something powerful. Good work.
Will
October 29th, 2006 at 5:34 pm
OK, I have to step back from this discussion. It has become apparent to me that I don’t know what a portal system is. I don’t want to try and debate the merits of a system that I don’t understand at all. I have presented a version of a website which is different, I suppose. Is there a model of a portal system out there that I can look at and try to understand? Is the Montgomery County site based on a portal system?
If the key difference between a portal system and another system is access to the editing of the site, I still support a webmaster-based, limited-access system. I think that as a state party the Greens have to come to agreement on values, policies and agenda (we have done this, some little differences aside) and present them in a strategic, pleasing and consistent manner. I think a webmaster-based, limited-access site can do all this, and avoids problems I’ve discussed before (making public all our disagreements and inevitable disputes).
Educate me,
Brian
October 29th, 2006 at 7:56 pm
Brian–
Know you now why I am so desperate to get as many technologically savvy people to dial into the teleconferences. I was thinking of scheduling a teleconference sometime next weekend but I have since been informed by one of the “gurus” that he will be out of town and basically incomunicado (at least, as far as a teleconference is concerned). So: Are there any other dates between now and Sunday, November 12th that are bad for anyone?
–N.B.
October 30th, 2006 at 10:06 am
Will–Python is on the server, but Django requires running it’s own process, which as far as I know, we don’t have rights to do.
Brian–Check out the demo’s of the systems i am recommending at the free demo website. You’ll see that what happens behind the scene at the website and the graphical design are two separate things. Each of these systems has various graphical themes or templates that are overlaid on top of the menuing, announcements, news, blogging, email, and access control systems. Once we have the foundation, we can look at using an existing template or theme or creating one of our own.
October 30th, 2006 at 11:46 am
I looked at a few of the free demos. To me, they appeared more complex than either my or Dave’s proposed new site. Both required scrolling down to see all content. When we finally get to the point of decided on a template, there are dozens to choose from. I think it is vital to get the website in shape within days - if we are right, Greens on the ballot state-wide will get hundreds or thousands of people interested in what the GP is and looking to the web. We need to have whatever in place next week.
What does a potral system offer that a number of blogs and listerves don’t? We already have a comprehensive mailing list in place and many independent blogs where lengthier discussions like this take place.
Can you speak to the access issue? This is my main concern. I want to be able to present a consistent position to other parties, media, and potential voters and activists. Can multiple administrators change the content of the website several times a day, even within hours if two people with different views on an issue decide that they really don’t like what the other is posting? This possibility presents more risks to me than one accountable webmaster operating a simple and consistent site.
Brian
October 30th, 2006 at 12:44 pm
I agree that we should get this up as soon as possible, but I also think we should keep in mind each of the counties that we are trying to support. (Are we trying to support all of the counties? I think we are. This is part of that whole policy question that needs more attention.) My goal is to give each county webmaster a login to a publishing system that allows them to create and modify a set of pages that he has providence over and that he/she doesn’t need to know anything about html or ftp to be able to update.
I would require an access control system to ensure that these county webmasters do not have access to each other’s county, or the statewide level. There would be overall admins that have access over all the counties, which I would expect they would not use, except in the case of lost passwords, people abandoning their duties, etc. At the statewide level, there would be webmasters that have control over the statewide content. It would be incumbent on them to create a set of policies that ensures that a coherent position is presented to the media.
A secondary goal is to make it easy for the county websites to have a similar look and feel as each other, which will make everything look coherent.
The portal systems offer these types of capabilities.
Once again, let us decide the policies that accomplish our goals. If we have one accountable webmaster operating a simple site, than this is a policy that has been decided on, but this implementation of the policy will have ramifications that need to be decided, such as what if that person is unavailable? If he has a substitute who fills in, how do those two people determine the content that should appear? Does this create a hierarchy that we are trying to avoid?
Don’t worry about dozens of templates to choose from, they can be changed without affecting the content. We can pick one that’s close to get us up and running and change it at will.
Take a look at the Drupal book above, it would be a good thing to show to a webmaster at the county or state level. Do you think it seems to offer what you’re thinking of?
October 30th, 2006 at 1:50 pm
ADAM SAYS: I agree that we should get this up as soon as possible, but I also think we should keep in mind each of the counties that we are trying to support. (Are we trying to support all of the counties? I think we are. This is part of that whole policy question that needs more attention.) My goal is to give each county webmaster a login to a publishing system that allows them to create and modify a set of pages that he has providence over and that he/she doesn’t need to know anything about html or ftp to be able to update.
I SAY: I agree that we ought to provide support for counties that want to develop websites. In the development of this policy, we ought to ask the locals how they feel about website maintenance. I am guessing that Montgomery County, for instance, is in support of the publishing system you are talking about. Baltimore County is probably not, because Dave has their site looking great. I know that Harford County, my local, is happy with our current system. We need to find out more to decide on a policy that affects each local’s web capabilities.
ADAM SAYS: I would require an access control system to ensure that these county webmasters do not have access to each other’s county, or the statewide level. There would be overall admins that have access over all the counties, which I would expect they would not use, except in the case of lost passwords, people abandoning their duties, etc. At the statewide level, there would be webmasters that have control over the statewide content. It would be incumbent on them to create a set of policies that ensures that a coherent position is presented to the media.
I SAY: My vision empowers a webmaster to maintain the state website. They will set up a way to recieve feedback and content from anyone who wants to give it. They will be held responsible by the CC and independent blogs and listserves. Your system does the same thing, except to a group of 5-10 people. One of the major problems with updating the website now is that while several people have the capability to do so, no one really know who to talk to about getting important information up quickly. I fear the same thing happening with a committee of administrators. And as the number of administrators goes up, the ability to get specific and consistent information up goes down.
ADAM SAYS: A secondary goal is to make it easy for the county websites to have a similar look and feel as each other, which will make everything look coherent.
The portal systems offer these types of capabilities.
I SAY: I’m not sure the goal is to create similar local-level websites. Each local has authority over how their meetings, officer structure, and website (I would assume) are run. I think there is a difference between the need for consistency in the state website and in individual local sites.
ADAM SAYS: Once again, let us decide the policies that accomplish our goals. If we have one accountable webmaster operating a simple site, than this is a policy that has been decided on, but this implementation of the policy will have ramifications that need to be decided, such as what if that person is unavailable? If he has a substitute who fills in, how do those two people determine the content that should appear? Does this create a hierarchy that we are trying to avoid?
I SAY: I think that the assumption is always that we look primarily to the person who is assigned a duty to fulfill their responsibility, but make arrangements in case a breach occurs. We have two coordinators that we trust to coordinate. If they should fail to live up their duty, we have procedures to replace them. We don’t have a nuumber of local-level “coordinator designees” who collectively perform the duties of the state-level coordinator if something goes wrong. I think the policy should be to follow the same model. The website does have to represent the entire state party consistently.
ADAM SAYS: Don’t worry about dozens of templates to choose from, they can be changed without affecting the content. We can pick one that’s close to get us up and running and change it at will.
Take a look at the Drupal book above, it would be a good thing to show to a webmaster at the county or state level. Do you think it seems to offer what you’re thinking of?
I SAY: I’m still not seeing an example of one of these sites up and running. The Drupal site shows screenshots, but I want to see one in action. Is there a link you can send?
Brian
October 30th, 2006 at 3:32 pm
Brian, You make some good points. I hadn’t considered that some counties would want to use their existing sites (I rarely check out counties other than Montgomery, so didn’t know how well they’re maintained. I can see the state site is lacking and dusty.)
You can go to any one of these a gallery of sites using Drupal I was surprised to see the Onion using it.