FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > CentOS > CentOS Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-23-2011, 05:19 PM
"James A. Peltier"
 
Default Website Version 2, next steps

----- Original Message -----
| Il giorno 23/feb/2011, alle ore 19.00, Karanbir Singh ha scritto:
|
| > On 02/23/2011 01:06 PM, Andrea Veri wrote:
| >>> Suggestions for a solution for the web site - please no "Joompal3,
| >>
| >> Drupal:
| >>
| >> 1. it has feeds support and they are easy to implement
| >
| > On the flip side : if primary content on the website is going to be
| > generated / project based rather than lots of text / cms style
| > content;
| > then do we need much more than a few static pages with the right css
| > thrown in on top - and let the apps run as they do with the same css
| > (
| > as much as possible ).
| >
| > Would drupal in this case not be a total overkill ?
|
| Going with static pages would be nice yes, but it is not really
| easy to maintain. We would need a git repo with special permissions
| and whatever. Drupal with its own account management can simplify
| this duty and allow multiple people to edit only part of the content
| available
| on the website. (i.e we have the administrator role that can modify
| modules,
| and pretty much everything, we do have the editor role that can modify
| just
| stories and other minor things)
|
| On a drupal istance adding and managing content is really easy, while
| doing a website from scratch (css, html, php, ...) can take more time
| to be
| developed and can take some of us to disagree on how the website will
| look like.
| (building a website requires a project and a lot of work to organize
| the content
| itself and its structure, while this won't actually happen with
| Drupal, since any of
| us have seen or played with a working drupal istance before today and
| know
| how and where the content is managed)
|
| Adopting static pages can be hard to maintain for a team, yet another
| vcs to
| push stuff to. But anyway I am open to any idea, my main interest is
| to change
| things making the current website a bit more useful and nice.
|
| Just my two cents.
|
| Andrea


I would highly recommend using CVS to maintain the base Drupal and third party module instances. Using CVS with the appropriate stable tags makes it easy to upgrade from version to version and makes maintenance of the thousands of Drupal modules much easier.

--
James A. Peltier
IT Services - Research Computing Group
Simon Fraser University - Burnaby Campus
Phone : 778-782-6573
Fax : 778-782-3045
E-Mail : jpeltier@sfu.ca
Website : http://www.sfu.ca/itservices
http://blogs.sfu.ca/people/jpeltier


_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 02-23-2011, 05:23 PM
"James A. Peltier"
 
Default Website Version 2, next steps

----- Original Message -----
| ----- Original Message -----
| | Il giorno 23/feb/2011, alle ore 19.00, Karanbir Singh ha scritto:
| |
| | > On 02/23/2011 01:06 PM, Andrea Veri wrote:
| | >>> Suggestions for a solution for the web site - please no
| | >>> "Joompal3,
| | >>
| | >> Drupal:
| | >>
| | >> 1. it has feeds support and they are easy to implement
| | >
| | > On the flip side : if primary content on the website is going to
| | > be
| | > generated / project based rather than lots of text / cms style
| | > content;
| | > then do we need much more than a few static pages with the right
| | > css
| | > thrown in on top - and let the apps run as they do with the same
| | > css
| | > (
| | > as much as possible ).
| | >
| | > Would drupal in this case not be a total overkill ?
| |
| | Going with static pages would be nice yes, but it is not really
| | easy to maintain. We would need a git repo with special permissions
| | and whatever. Drupal with its own account management can simplify
| | this duty and allow multiple people to edit only part of the content
| | available
| | on the website. (i.e we have the administrator role that can modify
| | modules,
| | and pretty much everything, we do have the editor role that can
| | modify
| | just
| | stories and other minor things)
| |
| | On a drupal istance adding and managing content is really easy,
| | while
| | doing a website from scratch (css, html, php, ...) can take more
| | time
| | to be
| | developed and can take some of us to disagree on how the website
| | will
| | look like.
| | (building a website requires a project and a lot of work to organize
| | the content
| | itself and its structure, while this won't actually happen with
| | Drupal, since any of
| | us have seen or played with a working drupal istance before today
| | and
| | know
| | how and where the content is managed)
| |
| | Adopting static pages can be hard to maintain for a team, yet
| | another
| | vcs to
| | push stuff to. But anyway I am open to any idea, my main interest is
| | to change
| | things making the current website a bit more useful and nice.
| |
| | Just my two cents.
| |
| | Andrea
|
|
| I would highly recommend using CVS to maintain the base Drupal and
| third party module instances. Using CVS with the appropriate stable
| tags makes it easy to upgrade from version to version and makes
| maintenance of the thousands of Drupal modules much easier.
|
| --
| James A. Peltier
| IT Services - Research Computing Group
| Simon Fraser University - Burnaby Campus
| Phone : 778-782-6573
| Fax : 778-782-3045
| E-Mail : jpeltier@sfu.ca
| Website : http://www.sfu.ca/itservices
| http://blogs.sfu.ca/people/jpeltier


Sorry, hit send too early

See: Checking out from the main repository

http://drupal.org/node/320


--
James A. Peltier
IT Services - Research Computing Group
Simon Fraser University - Burnaby Campus
Phone : 778-782-6573
Fax : 778-782-3045
E-Mail : jpeltier@sfu.ca
Website : http://www.sfu.ca/itservices
http://blogs.sfu.ca/people/jpeltier


_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 02-23-2011, 06:27 PM
Ljubomir Ljubojevic
 
Default Website Version 2, next steps

Andrea Veri wrote:
> Il giorno 23/feb/2011, alle ore 14.50, Ljubomir Ljubojevic ha scritto:
>
>> Andrea Veri wrote:
>>> Drupal:
>> -snip-
>>> 4. works fine on CentOS since we currently have the needed packages
>>> in EPEL. (so easy to upgrade or recover directly from RPMs)
>> I have one off-topic question.
>>
>> Where is Drupal installed from RPM? /var/www/html? What about multiple
>> domain servers? I am using Virtualmin on my server, is there any "copy"
>> script so I could make a copy of default Drupal instance inside the
>> /home/domain/html path?
>
> For a list of file, just grab the drupal rpm and do:
>
> repoquery --list package-name.rpm
>
> For the rest you should read an Apache guide, there is plenty on the web
> about virtual hosts etc.
>
> cheers,
>
> Andrea

I use virtual hosts for 3-4 years now, and I have built 8-10 Joomla
sites so far, but always by unpacking the zip into virtual hosts folder.
Updates are the same. So this is not an issue for me.

I was asking about deployment after RPM is installed, are better yet
updated, can that upgrade be automated or not. So my query is with RPM
deployment, not Drupal itself.

Nevermind, I'll browse trough changelog/readme files and find out.

Ljubomir
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 02-23-2011, 08:03 PM
Karanbir Singh
 
Default Website Version 2, next steps

On 02/23/2011 06:13 PM, Andrea Veri wrote:
> Adopting static pages can be hard to maintain for a team, yet another vcs to
> push stuff to. But anyway I am open to any idea, my main interest is to change
> things making the current website a bit more useful and nice.

if its dozens of pages, I'd agree. But in this case we might be talking
about potentially 1 page.

- KB
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 02-23-2011, 08:44 PM
Philippe Laurent
 
Default Website Version 2, next steps

CMS = possible security woes.
Certainly not worth the headache for a one page footprint.

On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists@karan.org> wrote:


On 02/23/2011 06:13 PM, Andrea Veri wrote:

> Adopting static pages can be hard to maintain for a team, yet another vcs to

> push stuff to. But anyway I am open to any idea, my main interest is to change

> things making the current website a bit more useful and nice.



if its dozens of pages, I'd agree. But in this case we might be talking

about potentially 1 page.



- KB

_______________________________________________

CentOS-devel mailing list

CentOS-devel@centos.org

http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel



_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 02-24-2011, 01:50 AM
Stephen Walsh
 
Default Website Version 2, next steps

On 02/24/2011 05:23 AM, James A. Peltier wrote:
> | I would highly recommend using CVS to maintain the base Drupal and
> | third party module instances. Using CVS with the appropriate stable
> | tags makes it easy to upgrade from version to version and makes
> | maintenance of the thousands of Drupal modules much easier.

There are tools like drush and aegir which are designed to plug into
puppet et al, and keep your site up to date. At a pinch, if we really
want to go down that path, we can even pull a patch set and apply just
the diffs as the code base evolves.

Management of the CMS is not the issue, it's the functionality and
suitability of what we use for the task, be it Wordpress, Drupal, Joomla
or ${select * from cms.favorites where type = 'php';}.

My preference is Drupal, mainly due to my experience with it, but I'd
done similar site with wordpress as well. There are ways to mitigate the
exploits and attacks that will come from running a php (or any type of )
CMS, but they're to be discussed down the track.

regards

Steve
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 02-24-2011, 02:22 AM
Cia Watson
 
Default Website Version 2, next steps

On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 19:13:53 +0100
Andrea Veri <av@gnome.org> wrote:

>
> Il giorno 23/feb/2011, alle ore 19.00, Karanbir Singh ha scritto:
>
> > On 02/23/2011 01:06 PM, Andrea Veri wrote:
> >>> Suggestions for a solution for the web site - please no "Joompal3,
> >>
> >> Drupal:
> >>
> >> 1. it has feeds support and they are easy to implement
> >
> > On the flip side : if primary content on the website is going to be
> > generated / project based rather than lots of text / cms style
> > content; then do we need much more than a few static pages with the
> > right css thrown in on top - and let the apps run as they do with
> > the same css ( as much as possible ).
> >
> > Would drupal in this case not be a total overkill ?
>
> Going with static pages would be nice yes, but it is not really
> easy to maintain. We would need a git repo with special permissions
> and whatever. Drupal with its own account management can simplify
> this duty and allow multiple people to edit only part of the content
> available on the website. (i.e we have the administrator role that
> can modify modules, and pretty much everything, we do have the editor
> role that can modify just stories and other minor things)
>
> On a drupal istance adding and managing content is really easy, while
> doing a website from scratch (css, html, php, ...) can take more time
> to be developed and can take some of us to disagree on how the
> website will look like. (building a website requires a project and a
> lot of work to organize the content itself and its structure, while
> this won't actually happen with Drupal, since any of us have seen or
> played with a working drupal istance before today and know how and
> where the content is managed)

As a small website owner who uses Drupal and having moved from static
hmtl I am considering going back to static html with css (once I learn
a few more css tricks), and then adding phpbb for the very low-volume
message traffic on my site. I do like Drupal but imho it's a pita to
keep updated. Of course it would depend on what modules you use, also. I
have pared down my module set to as few as possible, but sometimes an
update requires having to learn how to re-do permissions for the module
or other settings that are introduced have to be configured, or they
don't play well with the content.

One example of not playing well with the content is the 'footnotes'
module; which I plan to remove as soon as I can go through my few
articles and hand-code the html for the few footnotes I have. On the
'input type' for content the default is filtered html, then there's
full html and a 3rd option is 'footnotes'. Even if there aren't any
footnotes on a page, unless I select that input type all the formatting
for the paragraphs disappears and everything runs into a big blob of
text. I haven't worked very hard to see if it's a bug I should report
or not, I'm just reminded of the issue when I post something.

So, if you're using 'basic Drupal' with no modules or very very few of
them, it might not be an issue. But for my small site, the maintenance
and changes that come with it that have to be dealt with have me
looking to other options. Initially setting up the css and possibly
other things might be a hassle, but over time it might be the way to
go.
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 02-24-2011, 09:14 AM
Karanbir Singh
 
Default Website Version 2, next steps

Hi,

On 02/23/2011 09:03 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
>> Adopting static pages can be hard to maintain for a team, yet another vcs to
>> push stuff to. But anyway I am open to any idea, my main interest is to change
>> things making the current website a bit more useful and nice.

I am wondering if a critical bit of info isnt clear or missing.
Expanding on the original email the idea was :

- Split all user contributed and distro specific stuff to the wiki,
leaving the website as a first-point-of-reference and a link
amalgamation into various resources. With all app and generated content
being hosted behind www.c.o; the forums etc would move wherever they
need to, if they need to - its not related to the website.

Now, the issue as to why I *think*, and might be wrong, is that apart
from the homepage and perhaps a few other pages, the content behind the
website is going to all come from python / perl / php apps (scripts ?),
at the moment, and I can quite imagine a bit of ruby making an entrance
soon.

Also, when I say homepage and a few more pages, it *might* be that
count(few more pages) = 0;

- KB
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 03-01-2011, 07:54 AM
Andreas Rogge
 
Default Website Version 2, next steps

Am 23.02.2011 19:00, schrieb Karanbir Singh:
>
> On the flip side : if primary content on the website is going to be
> generated / project based rather than lots of text / cms style content;
> then do we need much more than a few static pages with the right css
> thrown in on top - and let the apps run as they do with the same css (
> as much as possible ).
>
> Would drupal in this case not be a total overkill ?

Maybe, maybe not.

But not having a CMS will become a maintenance-horror either. There is
no site that only aggregates feeds, there's always some content left
(i.e. you don't intend to generate "Download CentOS X"-Buttons by
crafting weird CSS-voodoo around an rss feed, do you?) and you have to
somehow organize the feeds you display.

So we need something that is good at news aggregation and that has at
least a few cms features.

I don't vote for Drupal (and also not against it). But I strongly
discourage the "just some static pages"-solution.

Regards,
Andreas

--
Solvention Ltd. & Co. KG
Egermannstr. 6-8
53359 Rheinbach

Tel: +49 2226 158179-0
Fax: +49 2226 158179-9

http://www.solvention.de
mailto:info@solvention.de
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 03-01-2011, 05:31 PM
Steve Meyers
 
Default Website Version 2, next steps

On 3/1/11 1:54 AM, Andreas Rogge wrote:
> But not having a CMS will become a maintenance-horror either. There is
> no site that only aggregates feeds, there's always some content left
> (i.e. you don't intend to generate "Download CentOS X"-Buttons by
> crafting weird CSS-voodoo around an rss feed, do you?) and you have to
> somehow organize the feeds you display.

I don't necessarily agree, depending on the number of pages. Assuming,
of course, that some PHP or other scripting is allowed on the back end
to do some simple stuff like grabbing and caching RSS feeds before
generating the page.

If you're using a CMS to manage just a couple pages, then you're
probably fighting with the CMS to make it work the way you want it to.
With just a few pages, the benefits aren't as significant.

Steve
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 02:24 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org