Re: The wgo CMS can't wait more

2006/10/25, Quim Gil <qgil desdeamericaconamor org>:
As a matter of fact I think we can get a decent wgo with the 5 tools, in
an ideal world with no time constraints and a good team of savvy CMS
hackers. But we need to end up with one tool, the one that brings the
best results with the minimum headaches for the type of website we want.

Agreed. I suggest using the GoodEnough pattern (

About Tiki: I think Tiki is a very bad choice. I have not so much
experience but I know that it is not very secure and has bad code
quality. It does not scale well. I know of a case where somebody had
given up to use TikiWiki because it could not deal with large amounts
of data.  TikiWiki gives you all you want, but not the quality or

About Midgard: I have the feeling that it is similar from the goals
(security, stability) as Drupal. So I also would say one of the two
(Drupal, Midgard) should be chosen.

BTW: KDE had also chosen Drupal for Why is here:

I think the whole process to decide which CMS to use was too
complicated (too many goals, too many requirements. I know this was
done with the best intentions, but I also see it this way: Drupal or
Midgard-  one of them might even be better today - but is it tomorrow?
So only real interesting question are:
* Does it a good enough job?  and:
* Does the development go in the right direction? Are errors fixed or
are the implementing features soon that we might want to use

I think to look in future decisions sometimes it is better to act and
trust in the spontaneous community feedback instead of going through
intensive testing that takes YEARS and in the end the results reflect
tests that have been made before some bugs where fixed. I Don' t think
detailled testing makes sense. I think every month that GNOME lives
without a choice is a lost month. Again: I think the intentions where
very good, but I think it was a bit overkill.

Linked In:

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