It's really a kludge to define 'page types' for (say) a book - a book is a book, not a page.
So in Django you define a book, in a modular application, and then define how it's displayed or represented, which of course could include having its own page - but also allows you to connect it to all kinds of other meaningful data.
django CMS is designed to allow you to integrate such modular applications. The tutorial http://docs.django-cms.org/en/develop/introduction/index.htm... covers this, in the section "Integrating a third-party application".
It allows you to reuse that structured content in many ways, everywhere.
(Django CMS as demonstrated in the video is purely about building pages, which makes it — if I'm being a bit harsh — just a glorified MS FrontPage.)
Even the demo http://demo.django-cms.org (good luck getting in at the moment, though) shows how django CMS can reuse structured data from multiple applications that also integrate with its editing and publishing tools (in the demo, news, people, events, jobs, etc).
There are biomedical labs for example that use django CMS to publish information automatically. Obviously django CMS itself knows nothing about biomedical data, but it provides the tools that make it very easy to integrate those applications (which thanks to Django are themselves very quick and easy to build).
Another example: https://developer.ubuntu.com/api/scopes/cpp/current/ is part of a django CMS site - and I can assure you that that API documentation is not coming out of a FrontPage-like page builder!
Where the video says "The Django CMS interface", the interface is clearly page-centric, not structured content-centric. It has building blocks like "feature-visual", "bg-home.jpg", "feature-content", "container", "row", "column col-md-24" etc.
How is that structured content?
Perhaps it can do structured content, but then why doesn't the video put that front and center? Is this perhaps an "also" feature, for building landing pages? Then why does the marketing talk about "content editors"?
So perhaps it's just the marketing that oversimplifies things? :)
I've been one of the skeptics on how big a change this was going to be for years, but now having looked at the delivered product I'm really impressed and really excited to move some old projects into it.
If you want more of a page based CMS, check out wagtail. Also pretty awesome, although in very different ways.
To then downvote, that's just sad.
If you want a lot of logic / custom code, I'd use django-cms!
Basically gives you views and controllers, you fetch posts in php files, manipulate them, then render out twig views.
You can even add custom routes: https://github.com/jarednova/timber/wiki/Routes. If I want to decouple WP and the frontend, I just add routes that return JSON, same as Express or any other modern framework.
With the coming of WordPress REST, I'm hopeful that a group more secure minded starts working on WP templates.
The CMS I use the most is Umbraco. It's an open-source ASP.NET CMS that I've used on a varied range of sites, from small to very large. It has its flaws, like most of these types of tools, but I recommend downloading it, and giving it a quick test.
* completely new user interface for content managers * updated accessibility, mobilized themes, etc * content types can now be created via the web using the Dexterity. * the Diazo theming system makes customizing the look of Plone real easy via the web * Deco allows you to customize the layout of pages via the web. While Deco is still an add-on, it is ready for production use, and will be included by default in Plone in the future.
While Dexterity, Diazo and Deco all can be used via the web, you can export anything created via the web to the file system. If desired this allows you to quickly prototype work with the active involvement of content managers and designers, then bring the project under file system version control and add more advanced features via programming.
None of these technologies are new. The plone community has been working on them for much of the last 5 years, and they were available as options or add-ons to Plone 4. But the level of polish achieved, and the knowledge that these tools are standard makes Plone 5 a major improvement.
I had built many sites with Plone 3 & 4. I liked Plone, but it could be difficult to learn to program. I spent much of the last four years away from active Plone development. I am very excited by the new features of Plone 5, it is much easier to program.
Even for a moderate site you would need a caching proxy in front. Code is not pythonic at all, but a java-esq class hierarchy over 15 levels deep.
Very small user base, little online help.
Will never touch again.
* [Craft CMS](https://craftcms.com/)
* [Perch Runway](https://grabaperch.com/products/runway)
Both are $200~300 per site, and like ProcessWire they are completely markup-agnostic and give you total flexibility to define your fields however you like.
I used to work for Torchbox who are developing Wagtail, so I heard about it before it went public. But looking at the uptake on http://madewithwagtail.org/ it seems to be doing very well in the market.
Thanks in advance!
Good grief. Thin white and black text on a red background. Why do you hate my eyes? Why??
File-file CMS so it'll make it really easy to make small sites for clients and then deploy them to a EC2 bucket or their shared-host.
The beta signup works but yields 404s [1], you might want to look into that.
Do you want well-written code and an extensible CMS, or do you want a great experience for non-technical users?
Is the usage going to be simple, or do you need workflows and approval systems?
Will the site always be in one language?
Do you want smart image cropping built in (& handling responsive imagery), will you use an external service or what?
I've used half a dozen in anger and I'm fascinated by what makes a good CMS for an organisation. I spent years looking for perfection; I'm now happy to work with any CMS. Once the core requirements are satisfied, my top tip is to look for something that's got decent support, and check there's always an upgrade path to future versions.
If anyone else likes to chew over what makes a good CMS, contact details are in my profile.
* https://www.odoo.com/page/e-commerce
* https://www.odoo.com/page/website-builder
It is very flexible to build dynamic pages and you can build pages like you want without development. (but you will have to modify the HTML/QWeb template)
Turns out it's still quite nice and quite easily hackable (plus there's still a strong community of people developing and maintaining plugins and other add-ons for it), though not so heavy on the WYSIWYG features people seem to think are synonymous with a CMS.
yes there are multiple CMS choices and I tried a few of them, nothing beats Drupal due to its modular design, wide community, open source, various plugins, security updates,etc.
There is only one thing I miss from Drupal, and that is the ability to create new "content types" on-the-fly. But here lies it weakness too. The resulting DB structure that allows this is relatively complicated which means that any custom development you do outside of the normal Drupal stuff is also more complicated than it has to be. This also has a direct performance impact.
With Django (and by extension, django CMS), the structure of the database is as clean or complicated as you require, and, there's nifty tools for migrating the schema and/or data as you evolve your project. Its beautiful, really.
I don't care about the programming language (PHP is fine, so is anything else). What I do care about is flexibility in terms of custom page types (e.g. define "Author", "Title", "Description", "ISBN", and "Cover Image" fields for page type "Book"; loop through such child items on the parent page).
Is Django CMS something that might make me happy? Are there any new projects on the horizon that look promising?