Not that I'm trying to stir things up, but I do have a fairly solid php
cms infrastructure that can be used, and would love to have you guys
evaluate for use... it would require a php/pgsql setup for www hosts,
and we would use replication to drive the content down. Yes a major
change in how things are structured, but change can be good.
Gavin
Josh Berkus wrote:
>Robert,
>
>
>
>>3b) Move any remaining bits of techdocs into a new architecture (current is
>>crufty php manually maintained) I personally think it should be openacs, but
>>even homebrew php done correctly would be a major upgrade.
>>
>>
>
>The problem is that OpenACS is an architecture, it's *not* a content manager.
>Honestly, my first thought when Justin "handed over" techdocs to me (not that
>I;ve done anything with it) was to contact the OpenACS folks and see if there
>was a full-service CMS built on OpenACS. There's not.
>
>Also, Bricolage's setup of generating static files from dynamic content should
>work a lot better with our site setup. It would mean that the majority of
>the Techdocs material could be mirrored just like the rest of www.
>
>If I end up running Techdocs, or if Elein does (I've suggested it becuase of
>the amount of energy she's put into General Bits) we're going to want a real
>CMS so that we don't spend time debugging HMTL/PHP that could be better spent
>managing authors and writing.
>
>
>