Live data from Hacker News

CMS Trap

hakunin.com

41–50 of 65 posts

Re: CMS Trap

#41
post #38

From an architecture point of view, I'm convinced that the CMS is better treated as a service, and not as part of your web application. This is especially true in a larger organization where content needs to be collected and managed in different ways (via import, or where people edit or curate content). At the start of this year, the company I work at had about six different CMS platforms. Many of the applications th…

I had LocomotiveCMS on my radar for quite a while as it looked very promising, but lost track as development staggered for a year or so. Do you use their hosted solution or do you host it on your own servers? Do you have any information if the version on Github[1] differs in significant ways from the hosted solution? It seems like they are really pushing the hosted solution now, their website doesn't make it very clear that you can install it by yourself too.

[1] https://github.com/locomotivecms/engine

Re: CMS Trap

#42
You're talking out of my soul! I see this behavior many many times in the last 10 Years, i admit, i do the same long time ago ;-)

The problem for the mass of developers is, that they "fall in love" with their CMS and that make them blind for obvious things.

We shift away from CMS as central point for web and web-application. CMS is only a tool to maintain simple static data in various languages for many people. For everything else (like shops) we use other systems, that are NOT a integrated part of a CMS.

If interaction between CMS and ohter systems is needed, implement a separate and clean API.

Re: CMS Trap

#43
post #38

From an architecture point of view, I'm convinced that the CMS is better treated as a service, and not as part of your web application. This is especially true in a larger organization where content needs to be collected and managed in different ways (via import, or where people edit or curate content). At the start of this year, the company I work at had about six different CMS platforms. Many of the applications th…

Thanks! Would you please how you handle SEO this way? (I assumed you embed content on the client, but maybe you do it server-side?)

A link to one of your apps/sites using this would be great.

Re: CMS Trap

#44
post #38

From an architecture point of view, I'm convinced that the CMS is better treated as a service, and not as part of your web application. This is especially true in a larger organization where content needs to be collected and managed in different ways (via import, or where people edit or curate content). At the start of this year, the company I work at had about six different CMS platforms. Many of the applications th…

[deleted]

Re: CMS Trap

#45
This is basically the same phenomenon that happens with frameworks. At first, the framework gives you a ton of functionality for the (initially) low price of living with its abstractions. As you want more custom functionality, you find yourself either fighting the framework with increasing levels of desperation, or simply coding around it. I'd argue that the best frameworks are such that you can code around them without causing huge overhead or resorting to objectionable tricks.

The same goes for CMSes. Many CMS customers would probably be better off if they took the CMS editor interface as a separate component and wrote the actual page renderer as a custom development separately. The trouble is of course, content systems make it very hard to do that. Having to make things work with the native mechanisms (and the often horrific underlying data model) is what makes huge CMS projects fail or at least perform miserably for everyone involved.

On the very top of the list of abhorrently convolute CMSes would probably have to be Typo3, followed after some distance by Drupal. But the more you work with the initially-liberal Wordpress the more you discover it's not that far behind either.

This reminds me of a bygone era: my startup (now long gone) had its own CMS. Sadly, that wasn't our actual product as we were a pure service company and the CMS was only a tool for us. In hindsight, we should have done it the other way around. Our CMS wasn't perfect, but it shone in a few areas that made the life of both developers and content editors very easy: a simple, accessible data model and an easily extensible page renderer. Unlike many other solutions it was designed to get things done, not to bill a lot of consultant hours. I've yet to come across an open source (or commercial for that matter) CMS that works equally well.

Re: CMS Trap

#46
post #38

From an architecture point of view, I'm convinced that the CMS is better treated as a service, and not as part of your web application. This is especially true in a larger organization where content needs to be collected and managed in different ways (via import, or where people edit or curate content). At the start of this year, the company I work at had about six different CMS platforms. Many of the applications th…

So you need to re-deploy for a simple typo fix?

Re: CMS Trap

#48
post #46
post #38

From an architecture point of view, I'm convinced that the CMS is better treated as a service, and not as part of your web application. This is especially true in a larger organization where content needs to be collected and managed in different ways (via import, or where people edit or curate content). At the start of this year, the company I work at had about six different CMS platforms. Many of the applications th…

So you need to re-deploy for a simple typo fix?

hey @kiro, I'm Didier, creator of LocomotiveCMS (www.locomotivecms.com). You do not need to re-deploy for a simple typo because the structure of your site and the content are definitely separated. You or your content editor will use the user back-office to fix that typo.

However, if you want to change the layout or tweak the style, you have to use Wagon and its frontend tools (SASS, Compass, Less, Compass), make your changes, test them locally with the embedded web server in Wagon, commit them to git if you version your site structure and then deploy. The redeployment won't touch the live data unless you modified your data structure. Hope my answer was clear :-)

Re: CMS Trap

#49
post #38

From an architecture point of view, I'm convinced that the CMS is better treated as a service, and not as part of your web application. This is especially true in a larger organization where content needs to be collected and managed in different ways (via import, or where people edit or curate content). At the start of this year, the company I work at had about six different CMS platforms. Many of the applications th…

thanks @foz, I could not have explained better than you did ;-)

Re: CMS Trap

#50
post #45

This is basically the same phenomenon that happens with frameworks. At first, the framework gives you a ton of functionality for the (initially) low price of living with its abstractions. As you want more custom functionality, you find yourself either fighting the framework with increasing levels of desperation, or simply coding around it. I'd argue that the best frameworks are such that you can code around them with…

The article is NOT about building systems on top of a regular CMS.

It's about starting to build a specialized system and ending up building a generic CMS because of an urge to make everything runtime-configurable.

Post reply on HN