So the Open source CMS contenders I am aware of are.

these links may also help
www.cms-list.org
www.la-grange.net/cms

HTML

I think the URL for Callisto CMS is www.callistocms.com, but neither that nor www.callistocms.org seem to be up. There is the sourceforge page though.

I'd also add to the list:
Movable Type (Perl)
PostNuke (PHP)

In my opinion the chief advantage of Everything is it is insanely customizable. By creating custom nodetypes you can do really complicated things which might be needed for a full content management system.

But it sounds like your users just want to drop something in and forget about it. In that case the simplicity of a wiki seems more attractive.

If I recall correctly, Everything requires a database while twiki doesn't. So backing up twiki is as simple as tarring up all the files and storing them elsewhere. It could even be done automatically out of cron

--
જલધર

I use UseMod over at GreenTechnologist.org and LavenderGreens.org. It's cheap and easy. It's even easier than TWiki and is a snap to set up.

Fun Fun Fun in the Fluffy Chair

I know nothing about Everything. But I worked on twiki a fair bit (3000 page site, 300 users). The things I like about it are:

• it is a very rich wiki implementation
• it is written in comprehensible perl
• the twiki.org community is very active and supportive

There is no benefit in using a relational database as a back end for a collaboration site like this - the things you want such as version differencing and free text search work well and fast using grep on flat files at this scale.

Is collaboration just a subset of content management... not in my humble opinion. TWiki is well balanced in its light touch (but available) security, user registration, locks and versioning - in my experience it is very hard to get users to actively collaborate and most content management systems employ a highly structured and therefore offputting UI.

PS. Not to mention T.120/NetMeeting style application sharing as collaboration.

A wiki is a fantastic tool, and they can be very easy to set up. For writing documentation or just keeping a shared whiteboard, that's what I'd use.

Some wiki implementations are really powerful. I hear good things about Twiki and Usemod, though I've never really looked into either.

Everything is capable of a lot more than a general wiki. If you wanted to implement Slash in Everything, you could. (I use the ubiquitous "you", as he has lots of spare time.) It may be overkill, but if you're doing something moderately complicated, you may spend less time learning Everything and doing things its way than adding features that don't fit into a traditional wiki format.

Besides that, we've fixed the installation issues and I'm working on cleaning up the code and making it faster. It still takes more time and resources than a wiki does because it does more. Now if someone would port it to DBD::SQLite, I've got a nice standalone web server....

*grin*

It is a proof of concept, and you gotta love it (using =pod for markup, pure genius).

Ask yourself what you need, and then go with the cheapest solution (be economical).

MJD says you can't just make shit up and expect the computer to know what you mean, retardo! ** The Third rule of perl club is a statement of fact: pod is sexy.

Although most of the time I'm using it with fairly savy computerists, I've also set up some discussion boards with UseMod wiki for some academic student/faculty committees. Some of the committee members didn't like the wiki, but I think those folks would have balked at anything online. Many of the people on the committes found it a useful tool.

I have looked at the Everything engine a bit, but so far the overhead in setting up a sql engine for it and mastering its customization world has been a bit too much.

If you want to look at UseMod, see http://www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UseModWiki/Download

I've talked my company (small one, some 10 employees) into using TWiki as a collaboration environment. It is used to document projects, store documents in a structured way, etc.

It's even been setup in such a way that project status can be exported to HTML and taken to a client on a laptop. While security is possible and present, one need not use it which lowers the threshold to use the system: it's just fun to use. The version control system is an excellent feature as well.

My co-workers are quite happy with it and it gets used a lot as opposed to previous attempts to set up such an environment.

Just my 2 cents, -gjb-

I have been developing projects based on the Everything Engine for some time now, both for my company and for myself I have always found it to be a sufficiently abstract environment in which to create online community spaces, multiuser web applications, managed, dynamic content systems, etc. etc. In many ways, it's the Perlish answer to Zope.

That said, it is a rather strange system to wrap your head around if you're not used to its style. First time setup and configuration is known to be a tad bewildering and you can expect to spend a good deal of time customizing its inner workings (and outer appearances) to suit your purpose.

Whether or not it's "right for you," depends on the scope and purpose of your project. If all you need is a pure, unadulterated wiki--and no more--you might have an easier time setting up an established system that's dedicated to that task.

There's a lot of renewed energy going into the Everything Engine right now, though, so it's probably a good time to hop on board. The code is easy to extend, well documented, and is supported by an increasingly active community.

The answer is: it depends.

Some CMSs are akin to the "bloggers" while some are oriented to Page Management. Take a look at SPINE by our very own Beatnik. That's a CMS that allows you to place pages and provide links to the stored pages fairly easily.

John J Reiser
newrisedesigns.com