[SLUG] Geeklog and the Lug Website

[Ian Eade at IGM]

In reply to:

Jamie

        adamsj at sdf-eu.org
  SDF-EU Public Access UNIX System
ICQ: 140365501 | Linux User: #314423



> I think you are right about the cross browser thing. No
> website is going to
> *completely* cross browser combatable. We can however do our 
> best to make sure that it works on as many browsers as 
> possible. As Geeklog stands at the moment it works with none 
> of the popular Linux browsers. Granted, the original site 
> will not render in older browsers (ie Netscape 4, but that 
> was more to do with the graphics format than layout) but it 
> did work in all the others I tried it with. As you say, 
> things can be sorted out over time but its critical that the 
> site renders okay from the start.


Spending time on formatting a development CMS could well be time wasted,
the initial goal is to see if the proposed CMS works and what it can and
cannot do. Having found this out then provides a decision as to whether
or not the CMS is fit for the purpose, if it is not then its binned,
otherwise it remains and all the formatting can be completed, safe in
the knowledge that time spent on formatting will not be wasted.



> Im not trying to be argumentative, but I would argue parts of 
> this statement as well. For a start, what are we going to put 
> on a calendar? The meeting dates? Wouldnt a simple list of 
> dates do the job equally as well? Artical submission is 
> needed, and Geeklog does do this. Its the way that it does 
> this that bothers me. De we need the option to leave 
> comments? Do we need to know how many times an Artical has 
> been read? Do we need login's and passwords? (my personal pet 
> hate), Do we need to know how many bloody words have been 
> written? Do we need to know how long it took to render the page?
> 


Either the bits that are not needed can be removed or you can choose to
ignore them when you visit the site


 
 
> It may be simple compared the some of the larger ones, but it 
> is still way too bloated and overpowered for what we 
> required. What is the point in spending all that time cutting 
> bits out of Geeklog to make it do what we want?


A very small amount of time is required to cut out the superfluous bits,
Geeklog's strength is its ability to add, edit and delete bits 



> 
> I had a quick surf around this morning to have a look for 
> possible alternatives, I came up with a couple but there are 
> bound to be loads more.
> 
> 1.	SiteMan
> 	http://www.ruinentertainment.com/helge/siteman/
> 	Simple system, easily customizable, no logins/passwords etc.
> 

No online demo or documentation, feature list etc. Download page hangs?





> 2.	Movable Type
> 	http://www.movabletype.org
> 	Many people favourate, could also be accused of being 
> over complex.

Written in Perl, does the SLUG site have the MySQL Perl module?
"Support for the DB_File Perl (Berkeley DB) module OR the MySQL database
& DBD::mysql"

Looks like rocket science:
http://www.movabletype.org/screenshots/screen-mainmenu.html



> 
> 3.	Rodin
> 	http://rodin.lot23.com
> 	Very simple system, themable or will integrate into 
> existing design.


Given that the download file is corrupted there's no way of knowing what
its like





> 
> Rodin looks quite promising, but it could be that none of 
> these are what we are looking for
> 
> > Or if we are to
> > build our own CMS then why will it be more appropriate than 
> an "out of 
> > the box" CMS? Unless of course the new CMS is to be a group project?
> 
> There is nothing to say that our own CMS would be any better 
> than Geeklog, though I suspect it would be. The fact is 
> though that as far as I know there is few people that are 
> willing to put the time into such a project. The lug is not 
> something that people use every day, or even every week for 
> that matter, exactly the reason why and article based system 
> is inappropriate for our site.
> 


Maybe if there is a reason for using the site then people would? At
present we'll never know, unless of course the object of the exercise is
in the design and development of the site and not its actual usage. 

I see no reason why Geeklog cannot be hacked into shape and then people
can get on with using it. Formatting and extra features can be removed
and the things that we need can be developed. Lets have a quick reminder
of what Geeklog can do:


Categorised Articles
http://scarborough.lug.org.uk/content/

Static Pages
http://scarborough.lug.org.uk/content/staticpages/index.php?page=2003042
7143922469

Article Submission 
http://scarborough.lug.org.uk/content/submit.php?type=story

Calendar 
http://scarborough.lug.org.uk/content/calendar.php

FAQ Page 
http://scarborough.lug.org.uk/content/faqman/index.php

Search
http://scarborough.lug.org.uk/content/search.php

Polls 
http://scarborough.lug.org.uk/content/pollbooth.php

Links Page 
http://scarborough.lug.org.uk/content/links.php

Stats 
http://scarborough.lug.org.uk/content/stats.php

Print Stories 
http://scarborough.lug.org.uk/content/article.php?story=2003042301445319
4&mode=print

Email Article
http://scarborough.lug.org.uk/content/profiles.php?sid=20030423014101291
&what=emailstory

Article Comments
Article Dates
User Accounts
Scaleable page architecture
Modular code design
PHP scripted
MySQL database driven
Admin assignment for features



So here's one way of looking at it, forget about the formatting etc and
place a tick against the items that you think are required and a cross
against those that are not. If there are more ticks than crosses then
Geeklog remains, now may I propose that you get your pencil out and be
honest.

Ian