Message-ID: <3FDF8977.9050401@ehpg.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 14:38:47 -0800
From: "Gavin M. Roy" <gmr@ehpg.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
	rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031205 Thunderbird/0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pgsql-www@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Hello and some questions
References: <3FDE28DA.5070902@ehpg.net>
	<200312151951.06917.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
	<200312161407.20475.josh@agliodbs.com>
In-Reply-To: <200312161407.20475.josh@agliodbs.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Not that I'm trying to stir things up, but I do have a fairly solid php 
cms infrastructure that can be used, and would love to have you guys 
evaluate for use... it would require a php/pgsql setup for www hosts, 
and we would use replication to drive the content down.  Yes a major 
change in how things are structured, but change can be good.

Gavin

Josh Berkus wrote:

>Robert,
>
>  
>
>>3b) Move any remaining bits of techdocs into a new architecture (current is 
>>crufty php manually maintained) I personally think it should be openacs, but 
>>even homebrew php done correctly would be a major upgrade. 
>>    
>>
>
>The problem is that OpenACS is an architecture, it's *not* a content manager.   
>Honestly, my first thought when Justin "handed over" techdocs to me (not that 
>I;ve done anything with it) was to contact the OpenACS folks and see if there 
>was a full-service CMS built on OpenACS.  There's not.
>
>Also, Bricolage's setup of generating static files from dynamic content should 
>work a lot better with our site setup.  It would mean that the majority of 
>the Techdocs material could be mirrored just like the rest of www.
>
>If I end up running Techdocs, or if Elein does (I've suggested it becuase of 
>the amount of energy she's put into General Bits) we're going to want a real 
>CMS so that we don't spend time debugging HMTL/PHP that could be better spent 
>managing authors and writing.
>
>  
>