[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
Having tested Zope/Plone for use with our own website, I have to temper Matt's
enthusiasm a little.
Plone can do the non-table layouts using CSS but only in a limited way - the
templates and final appearance of the site are quite rigid. Despite lots of
claims that the single (75Mb) data file for Plone is transferable between
installations (for backup / testing purposes etc.), I was unable to get any
data files to operate on alternate systems. Whichever direction I tried, it
failed - not "that looks a bit odd" but "HTTP 403 Forbidden" or "HTTP 500
Internal Server Error", other cryptic Plone engine errors and simple
"unauthorised" messages.
Plone does not integrate well with other site features like an external
archive, existing database scripts and external programs. You can extend it
with Python but it cannot bring external non-Python content into the CMS
pages.
Plone also requires unusual changes to your Apache config that can break other
sites or processes on the same server. I spent many hours getting Plone to
operate on a test server and the installation instructions are confused and
inaccurate in places.
Personally, I found Plone was slow, cumbersome, difficult to secure, difficult
to adapt and impossible to backup or transfer between sites.
100% CSS, no tables for markup. Accessible, XHTML. In short: It rocks.
Until you need to work it in with non-Python external routines and until you
want a backup of that immense Data.fs file.
Sorry, Matt, our experiment with Plone has left me completely underwhelmed and
I bitterly regret the MONTHS wasted on testing it. I should never have used
Plone for the dcglug test website on my own server, I cannot recommend that
anyone else tries it and I feel obliged to point out the horrors of my
experience to those who ask for an honest recommendation.
Attachment:
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part