I've recently looked into Plone quite a bit last summer. I really liked it a lot, but ran into a wall trying to deploy to a shared hosting environment. I forget exactly what it was, but there was some process that needs to be running and even with shell (not root) access I couldn't get it set up.

It's a great system though, if you have the capability to run it. If you learned PHP, Python shouldn't be too hard. It's pretty nice.

Regarding creating a module for CMS for Xoops, I'd suggest looking into it more as a packaging of Xoops. That is, we configure a default install of XOOPS with articles and news and blog, etc. configured in more of a CMS style, as opposed to the regular default install which is community-oriented. We may still need some new modules to handle history (revisions), etc., but to a large extent, I'd see it as a packaging effort.

I'm very interested in the CMS side. I go round and round trying to find a system that offers good flexibility and features but also provides a relatively painless way to manage a 'regular' (non-community) web site. I like XOOPS a lot and believe it has a great foundation (the code isn't as scary to look at as many out there). A CMS-oriented packaging would be really nice I think.

-Tom

NOTE: I'm NOT talking about a fork! :O

I am running plone on an intranet. It is much more plug and play than xoops. The reason that it is not easy to install on a shared host is that it doesn't make use of the apache server. It is it's own server.

Hi Zardoz,

Congrats on your first post! And welcome to the world of XOOPS

Quote:

I totally agree. It's something I'd be interested in working on.

Andy

I am in the process of gathering modules and placing them in packages targeting various types of sites, such as Community Site (interaction), Corporate Website (presentation), Intranet (communication)

I am fairly convinced that with the proper module(s), XOOPS could do what other systems do well in the area of content management. XOOPS tries to be a lot of things, and I belive that the foundation is stronger than most other open source systems to build efficient and feature-rich modules on top of XOOPS.

I think that Plone is great for a webmaster as the setup and management is so easy so you can get a great cms going without a hitch. I have a Plone site running and I set up a Postnuke site up too. I am currently trying out XOOPS for some of my other website projects. This cms development website stuff is new to me. But my current experience lets me know that I will be coding my own cms system in the background as I operate a Xoops, Postnuke website, etc. I need to have total control of my future cms system and be self sufficient.

Quote:

You sound just like me :)

Quote:
Well, that's not accurate anymore. As of Plone 2.0, which was released last spring, Plone has very good support for groups of users. The "roles" that another poster described as groups (Manager,Owner,Reviewer,etc) are not intended to be anything like a group.

I use Plone at work for a company intranet and XOOPS for personal hacking to make community oriented sites. I am more "capable" with Xoops, but have done some fairly serious hacking in Plone, including authoring some howto's on plone.org. I consider the 2 to be completely different in focus and capability. I could never get XOOPS to work as smoothly as Plone for our company intranet. For one thing, the groups capability is so good it ties into our Active Directory group structure and I can grant role-based access to folders for groups that our NT admins maintain. That's extra work I don't have to do, just hook it up and forget it.

OTOH, XOOPS is so much easier to work with if you want to really customize things and don't mind coding (which I enjoy). I have written several XOOPS modules and plan to write more. I have no desire to write a Plone "product", it's just too complex. Stuff breaks that I have no idea how to fix. With Plone, I must depend much more on the kindness of the Python/zope wizards, with XOOPS I can figure it out myself.

Dennis