An SMF CMS?

[OvermindDL1]

Sorry, meant Javascript, I have my Javascript (ECMAScript) locked down pretty well.

[[ maCe ]]

beau - Well the CMS isn't being developed by the people who make SMF, its being made by us, the community..

I did see a CMS that included a html drag and drop system, but I can't recall its name :\

[[Unknown]]

Roxpace, don't get me wrong... but we would be fools to write software for wide spread web-based usage in Java.  I wouldn't do it in Python, Java, ASP.NET, or anything like that.  Java is the WORST of those, because it is installed on an even SMALLER subset of servers.

My dislike and disagreement of Java paradigms aside, using PHP or Perl would be the only real way to go.  I, at least, am not going to work on this CMS if it's target is, and only is, people with dedicated servers.  That would be a complete and total waste of my time.  That's most certainly not the intention with SMF!

And, this goes to database engines as well for those "PostgreSQL RAWKS" or "FirebirdSQL pwns MySQL" people.  That's not the point.  Frankly, I can do anything without subqueries that I can do with them - it may just be a bit slower (or in cases people like to ignore, faster, mind you) but it works.  However, if I were to use FirebirdSQL I might as well write it in Ruby as well.  I won't decrease my userbase much more (5% to maybe 3%?)

No.  The server side is almost certainly going to, at the very least, use PHP.  It may or may not use MySQL - I make no predictions at this point - but if it uses any database engines, it will support MySQL I'm certain.  I'm sorry - there just aren't any other options for the server side.  It's PHP or Perl, and most hosts have mod_php not mod_perl, so I'd prefer PHP.

-[Unknown]

[OvermindDL1]

Definitally agreed with that.

[roxpace]

I do understand your points, and I respect them very much.

Flash is ok, and I agree to never make things more advance than necessary. It would be great to see some example of a such thing in the near future made in Flash, haven't been much into multimedia extensions so I may need to learn some tricks here maybe

I also understand if one product like SMF is made in less advanced development languages and databases to meet up the most popular server solutions so more people can take advantage of this great product.

But if I would do anything I would use Java / Servlets since I know how much my customers would pay for it and those are larger corporations and government departments/military, and I also I wanna get the most use of a product as possible for many purposes not just world-wide web as some may have understood so far. I aim for little more than this.

But if I would go my own path and use Java / Servlets I also knows that most open-source people could not use that product since their servers doesn't have that technology available.

But I do not agree that MySQL only is a good call, why not aim for a more common solution through ADOdb (one example) and support many databases at once and also use for example subqueries when possible (unless the server is using a less advanced db engine), and I thought MySQL 4.x is supporting subqueries so why not aim for that entirely or is it many out there who is still using MySQL 3.x ?

My own personal conclusion would be, use PHP with ADOdb (only one example) for this kind of product.

[[Unknown]]

But I do not agree that MySQL only is a good call, why not aim for a more common solution through ADOdb (one example) and support many databases at once and also use for example subqueries when possible (unless the server is using a less advanced db engine), and I thought MySQL 4.x is supporting subqueries so why not aim for that entirely or is it many out there who is still using MySQL 3.x ?

My own personal conclusion would be, use PHP with ADOdb (only one example) for this kind of product.

I didn't say only - I said at least.  I said nothing about ADO, ODBC, PDO, etc... just that it would use MySQL if it used any database engines.  It might use five, but one will be MySQL - if any.  I'm not trying to prophesy here.  And PDO is PHP 5 only...

As for MySQL, it has subqueries in 4.1.x, and many do indeed use 3.23.x and a LOT use 4.0.x.

Using subqueries "when possible" is often digging yourself a hole in maintainability.

-[Unknown]

[Mark_Breznay]

I am in favor of a SMF portal.
Mark

[[ maCe ]]

But we're considering an SMF CMS.

Theres already a portal out I think..

[b_michael]

I would switch to an SMF CMS in a heartbeat, provided it had the features I needed. I'm currently running the Mambo bridge. I have had an opportunity to try all the popular CMS's through Fantasico, and I will say that Mambo is the best CMS for a coulpe reasons...

1. The ease of adding features/componets and the wide varity of those features.

2. The ease of the overall Mambo design

Both of these "philosophies" seem to be appriciated by Simple Machines, so that's why I'd switch. Its funny because before I knew anything about the bridge I was thinking, "If I could combine the two it would be the best and the best."

You may also find it interesting to know that when members of Mambo ask if Mambo has a discussion componet, the SMF bridge is the first reccomendation...

Excellent work!

[Miraenda]

I think an SMF CMS being developed is a great idea, and I wanted to encourage that it is actually fully integrated with SMF for those who choose the CMS.  The main issue with many CMS systems is that the forum component is usually developed by a different team and not part of the CMS itself, so you have integration issues with it, style issues with it, etc.

I would use an SMF CMS in a heartbeat if SMF were fully integrated and part of the CMS on the get go without my having to get it to work, get the themes to match, etc.  Synching up styles easily to where a style added to the CMS fully changes the forum theme would be great.  For true simplicity as most CMS do add a forum community, having SMF integrate as part of the CMS itself would be fabulous.

I also think that if you keep a similar admin system to SMF that would help users in SMF to easily transition to using the CMS if they choose that option.  I don't see why the CMS couldn't have a forum-type feel for the admin area where you could have just more CMS type options than a forum does.

[NoRad]

While we're at it, why not do a gallery packag? Coppermine is kinda bleh. 

[RGSMDNR]

While we're at it, why not do a gallery packag? Coppermine is kinda bleh. 

you got that right...

[ediww]

hi guys,

what you you really need? maybe not a cms? really, what an really-end-user will want from an community web site?

CMS? maybe not?

gallery? blogs? some portal around them? do you need YetAnotherSimpleOrNotCMS?

or just intergration with some other free, and already existing packages?

i would prefer if some of the open (free) softwares do agree and do manage to have some, at least, bridge system around the users and groups.

then, you can have a cms, galleries, or w'atewa' you want around - or integrate with one - easily.

you can have a talk with wordpress or coppermine devs to support an more or less compatible api - so, for example, an sysadm like me w/o much experience in php can write some code and bridge or fully integrate the two different products.

take a look at some commercial warez - forum, gallery, blog and a file manager;) and you got an considerable percentage of users (not end-users) happy, with all they need to have and start a place for their community. and not JUST a scratch start place.

i think that having such pack, composed from different free/open source softwares, is more important than having an CMS. this may or may not be a complete pack from simple machines.

you can add an CMS - later. as an yet-another-part. or just support one or many already existing cms'es. or they can support you - if they have a clean "point" to connect with smf - api or something else, which will not change often, at least the "interface".

wwell edi

[Abedie]

Hi guys,

Interresting idea a CMS but I would rather like a SMFCIS (Simple Machines Communication & Information System), yep, something new (I think).
What is going on on most sites that are great, using a form of CMS or portal? Yes, is communication that is make it sparkling and growing, specially with the wap options, most phones are using these days, included.

A few thoughts first:
- The cms- or portal system that does it all for everybody's wishes does not exist.
Making one new cms will add it to all the (many) others.

- The goal is about communication & information and so community forming, using a forum script, obvious the best there is: SMF.

- Once upon a time there was 'another free forum' that did make a very good move in making there forum modular and motivate programmers in writing modules for it's system. That works very well and it was growing fast as well as there supporting community, until the money started to rule and many good writers left.

- It was not a bad idea to spread the word of the start of SMF by trying to integrate as many as possible 'other scripts' as coppermine, mambo etc. Going to start the competition by making a SMF CMS will not make the 'others' fell in love with SMF.

- Most little handy phones has today options as WAP and other communication thingies as email etc. that users want to use! A site that offers all those options as webmail and information versions as wap pages has a pré.

So in the end (or better as start) make something new (if it's not allready there).
I think the experience in adapting SMF to work with other good scripts, must have delivered knowledge to create a new system, with SMF as engine, some basic modules as start with some interlink system scripts to link new scripts, written by SMF or thirth party's, tested by a SMF-team before going into action.
As user of many systems over the past 25 years I can say one thing about it: Keep it simple for the users! I not only mean the admins, but also the visitors of such sites!
I have lost many users by having menu's with all the options of portals or cms scripts making them run of crazy. So start with little amount of menu-options and give them the option to select more options as they gain experience at choice.

I think of having SMF as base, viewable by wap on chosen topics, having a sms if something happens (at choice), of course my phonenumber at my infobase, having some info pages and a help section, a direct link sort of livehelp/communication, a kind of webmail or link to there own email base, an agenda for personal and for groupwise activities, a notebook, some group pages, options to give lessons with sound and pictures, all with the SMF theme's as base and a banner system, etc.

Hmm, whats that for an idea?

By for now with greetings and all the best,
Abedie.

[Dannii]

On a very few occasions flash is okay, but I have never liked it when it builds the website design.

Would this CMS work with other forums?

[NoRad]

OT --- Gotta take flash even more serious now that Adobe bought out Macromedia. PDF + Flash + database Connectivity = aaaawesssssssome.

[Miraenda]

OT --- Gotta take flash even more serious now that Adobe bought out Macromedia. PDF + Flash + database Connectivity = aaaawesssssssome.

Woah, that made me think of this link I read a couple weeks ago - http://daringfireball.net/2005/04/adobe_translation

Love this bit:

Original acquisition FAQ

What is the mission of the combined company?

Adobe's mission remains the same — to help people and businesses communicate better. With the acquisition of Macromedia, Adobe strengthens its mission through the combination of leading-edge development, authoring and collaboration tools — and the complementary functionality of PDF and Flash.

Translation into normal-speak

Where by "complementary" we mean "the two leading technologies that irritate people when they're used in lieu of regular web pages." Note that we're using PDF to serve this very FAQ — in our synergistic future, perhaps we'll serve our FAQs in a hybrid PDF/Flash format. One can dream.

As well as this one:

Original acquisition FAQ

Do you expect to integrate the FlashPlayer and the Adobe Reader?

The complementary functionality of FlashPlayer and Adobe Reader will enable the deployment of a more robust cross-media, rich-client technology platform. The combined company will continue to be committed to the needs of both the FlashPlayer and Adobe Reader users.

Translation into normal-speak

You think the current version of Acrobat Reader takes too long to launch, runs too slowly, and uses too much memory? You ain't seen nothing yet.

[NoRad]

Great find. I got a good laugh out of it, but I hope the merger actually moves things forward. Adobe has moved into a new realm. Microsoft and Apple are in their rear view mirror in my opinion...

[WSA]

is it ready yet?

[[Unknown]]

is it ready yet?

Are we there yet?

-[Unknown]