in reply to Re: Content management system recommendations?
in thread Content management system recommendations?

After looking at your homepage, I'll second the recommendation for moveable type. It's easy to install, Perl, and uses DBM and templates. I've been playing around with it on both FreeBSD and Win32. The code looks reasonably clean.

The roll-your-own route is tempting. I've done that a few times, and have several Wiki clones running in production serving various private communities. It depends on what you want to do. Wiki is a great collaborative tool. It lets the community shape the site. The various blogging tools set the shape of the site in wet concrete. Your site looks much more like a flat weblog.

  • Comment on Re: Re: Content management system recommendations?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re(3): Content management system recommendations?
by FoxtrotUniform (Prior) on Jan 16, 2002 at 02:02 UTC

    Unless you've been looking at a cached copy of infernus.net in Google, you probably haven't been looking in the "right" place. :-) For that matter, I mean to do more than just flat weblogging -- music mini-reviews and managing free virtual-domain hosting come to mind; we'll see how far that goes, though.

    Right now, I'm tending towards OpenInteract. It looks fairly clean, interface-wise, and does what I want. (I haven't looked much at moveable type, but I have vague issues with their source code license.)

    I'd be interested to hear from any Everything hackers; how easy is it to hack the code base?

    --
    :wq
[reply]
      I don't know about OpenInteract itself, but it is built on the SPOPS database object layer, which I have had bad experiences with. Maybe now they have improved, though.
      A massive flamewar beneath your chosen depth has not been shown here
[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom