Re: WineHQ on CMS/Framework
Sun, Sep 23, 2012 04:33, Aleksey Bragin wrote: > Two prototype websites were made, one using Drupal7 and another one > (more recent and more complete) using Typo3. What's important is that we > have a substantial set of interconnected services too: I honestly haven't heard of Typo3 before now (I guess it really hasn't caught on outside the German-speaking world yet), but my first impression is that may be closer to what we would want than Drupal. I've heard that Drupal can be very brittle and hard to use if your design doesn't fit a template. The fact that your T3 prototype is more complete despite being a younger site seems like a hint that it has been more productive for you. Being able to integrate most of your services with the CMS is also very reassuring. Have you come across a situation where you think having a framework would have helped? The main scenario I'm picturing is if someday we wanted to combine data from different parts of the website (for example, bugzilla queries along with related git patches). That may be overdoing things, but I feel like those cross-connections are one of the main things that could really help WineHQ. Right now it seems like there's a lot of good information, but it may be spread out over forum threads, mailing lists, the wiki, AppDB, etc. with no simple way to connect the dots (even after using search). - Kyle
Re: WineHQ on CMS/Framework
We had same question in the ReactOS web site. We have our own in-house developed CMS called RosCMS now, however there is a strong desire to change it to something maintained by 3rd party, so Drupal and Typo3 were considered. Two prototype websites were made, one using Drupal7 and another one (more recent and more complete) using Typo3. What's important is that we have a substantial set of interconnected services too: * JIRA (formerly Bugzilla, integrated authentication with the main website) * Mailing lists (no need for integration) * FishEye as a source code browser (integrated) * GIT mirror with source code browser (no need for integration) * Doxygen source code browser (no need for integration) * MediaWiki (fully integrated, single sign-on) * Forums (fully integrated, single sign-on) * Compatibility database (integrated with RosCMS, single sign-on, however it's ported neither to D7 nor T3) * Test manager (http://www.reactos.org/testman ) * Paste service (fully integrated to prevent spam, single sign-on) * Trunk builds download manager (http://www.reactos.org/getbuilds/ ) If any help is needed, let me know, would be glad to share. Best regards, Aleksey Bragin. On 22.09.2012 7:32, Kyle Auble wrote: After working on the wiki for a while, I finally wanted to ask about possibly moving WineHQ to a CMS or web framework. First off, while there are a couple of mentions on the wiki and mailing lists, is there still much interest in doing this? If there is, I think the second question is which kind of system do we want to use? While http://wiki.winehq.org/WinehqDesign mentions Drupal, which has a lot of plugins and features for easy editing, I've read that a CMS can become a hassle if your website needs to do more complex things than serving regular chunks of content. WineHQ provides a bug-tracker, a forum, a wiki, mailing lists, source-code browsers, and other tools besides static content, with lots of interconnections between them. If we did go with a web framework, we could still probably run a CMS on top of it for the AppDB and static pages.
WineHQ on CMS/Framework
After working on the wiki for a while, I finally wanted to ask about possibly moving WineHQ to a CMS or web framework. First off, while there are a couple of mentions on the wiki and mailing lists, is there still much interest in doing this? If there is, I think the second question is which kind of system do we want to use? While http://wiki.winehq.org/WinehqDesign mentions Drupal, which has a lot of plugins and features for easy editing, I've read that a CMS can become a hassle if your website needs to do more complex things than serving regular chunks of content. WineHQ provides a bug-tracker, a forum, a wiki, mailing lists, source-code browsers, and other tools besides static content, with lots of interconnections between them. If we did go with a web framework, we could still probably run a CMS on top of it for the AppDB and static pages. Finally, for the frameworks, it seems that one of the main differences is simply which language we want to deal with. Is there a strong preference for using a specific language? Right now the various parts outside of Wine proper use a mix of Perl, PHP, and Python. This also raises the question of whether there's any desire to (over the very long term) try consolidating all the code outside Wine around one or two languages. I'm guessing it wouldn't be worth the trouble (different tools for different jobs), but if there is a strong reason to, it would probably be good to pick a framework in the language we want to emphasize. - Kyle
