[theforum] To clarify

Martin Paul Burns martin.burns at uk.ibm.com
Tue Nov 9 07:44:13 CST 2004

John wrote: wrote on 08/11/2004 18:15:41:

> I'm seeing a whole bunch of posts which say "we don't want
> another bespoke system for www.evolt.org", and none at all for
> the opposite POV.
> Can anyone who thinks we don't want to go off-the-shelf please
> say so, here, very loudly, right now, please?

Remembering the original comparison I posted:

a) Customise a packaged CMS, saving a lot of effort (do we *really*
need to code Yet Another Roles Based Authentication System?) gaining
lots of useful new stuff that we've always wanted (eg i18n) and gaining
a lot of other people's ongoing effort but perhaps replicating only 90%
of the current functionality (say losing content ratings)

b) Bespoke a system again, and live with the reverse set of

please can we remember that in making this choice, we have *already*
accepted that losing some existing functionality is OK.

>From my PoV, any CMS that provides:

1) Multi-user authoring with associated roles/permissions
2) Workflow
3) A framework for building other things we need that uses tools that
evolters can get into

is plenty fine, even if that's *all* we have on 1st Feb.

While documenting what we already have is a useful starting point,
particularly in assessing what functionality is critical -v- what can be
lost, let's not get lost in the assumption that the new system will deliver
it all in exactly the same way, or start curbing the enthusiasm being
generated with lots of "That's not how we've done things in these parts"

I suggest we start managing expectations when we announce the move to the
wider community...


More information about the theforum mailing list