Nigel McFarlane wrote:

Whatever we use has to be hackable.


The benefit of even a trivial CMS is that we can hack
at the content level, not at the infrastructure level.

My thought is that a CMS should be used in a no-brainer way,
not in a fancy way.  You don't need to be a DB guru to use
MySQL, and the same is true of a simple CMS. Just install
it and run it; don't get sucked into complicated uses.

Sorry, Murphy was an optimist. I mean hackable at the infrastructure level, because things go wrong there and you have to fend for yourself. Otherwise we could buy at MS and trust in a support contract (and wait by the phone).


No opaque database formats.

Text files are better; Unix philosophy wins.

If you want a "fast and wrong" start,

Worse is better is not fast and wrong. They're totally different things. Have you read http://www.jwz.org/doc/worse-is-better.html ?


then let's be
fast and wrong in the right ballpark: content. That requires
no code or infrastructure, just a static and trivial website
with a weekly review of logs to see what readers are
attracted to. Styling unnecessary; navigation minimal.

Navigation, or rather search and multiple indexes, is necessary. Styling should be attractive as you say, but that takes work. Default flat-document text style is not enough.


/be
_______________________________________________
mozilla-documentation mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-documentation

Reply via email to