On Thu, 2007-12-20 at 18:47 -0600, King InuYasha wrote:
I was aware of that, which is why I suggested Enano CMS. It is a
hybrid of a wiki and a CMS, implementing literally the best of both
worlds.
Is it truly a wiki or does it just have a wiki-syntax-like editor
capability?
A wiki finds its success in being open and easy to edit. It is the
easiest method to scratch an itch. This is where our wiki
implementation has suffered the most (IMO.)
I could see a CMS and a wiki engine integrated, in terms of using the
same account system and having a method to move content between the two
faces. But once you put that content under management, it is no longer
the flexible content of a wiki.
- Karsten
On Dec 20, 2007 6:00 PM, Karsten Wade <kwade(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 2007-12-15 at 09:23 -0600, King InuYasha wrote:
> If we do decide to move to a CMS
A CMS solves a different set of problems than a wiki.
The core of what makes a CMS useful (workflow and management
of content
over time, levels of control (ACLs) for certain content) is
anathema to
what a wiki is (fast changes, many hands involved, rapidly
moving
content through time.)
There is no reason we cannot have both. It is why daMaestro
is rolling
out Plone for
docs.fedoraproject.org.
- Karsten
--
Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr.
Dev Fu :
http://developer.redhatmagazine.com
Fedora :
http://quaid.fedorapeople.org
gpg key : AD0E0C41
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list --
Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr.
Dev Fu :
http://developer.redhatmagazine.com
Fedora :
http://quaid.fedorapeople.org
gpg key : AD0E0C41