CMS choice - Zikula is the new Fedora CMS

[David Nalley]

Inline reply

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Jared Smith <jaredsmith at jaredsmith.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-01-28 at 11:32 -0500, David Nalley wrote:
>> Which brings me to the question - why are we languishing when it comes
>> to making this decision?
>
> Because I don't feel we haven't fully been able to articulate our
> reasons for wanting a CMS, and I think it would be premature to choose
> one particular CMS before deciding if *any* CMS is the proper solution.

Well I have two responses - how did we get to this stage of things
without articulating why we need the CMS. I think this goes back to
our scope issue more than anything. A CMS is a great tool for the
Packaging and Legal docs that are currently held on the wiki. And
based on the conversations in IRC it sounds like we want to use it as
a publishing platform. - ie - take the publican generated output of
DocBook and make pushing all of it up easier.

>
>> We even regressed and talked about if/why we
>> need a CMS (and I am one of the guilty parties here)
>
> I'm probably the most guilty here, as I spent a lot of time last weekend
> trying to figure out how we get a CMS to handle various aspects of
> taking single-page HTML/multi-page (chunked) HTML/PDFs out of our
> DocBook toolchain and into a CMS in such a way that it's not a hack.
>
> If Zikula (or another CMS) already have provisions for this, then I'm
> happy to move forward.  But based on the discussions both here on the
> list and in the IRC channel, I don't feel my questions have been
> adequately addressed.

This is something we need to ask - Simon - thoughts here?



>
> My 2 cents (before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization)...
>
> -Jared
>
> --
> fedora-docs-list mailing list
> fedora-docs-list at redhat.com
> To unsubscribe:
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
>