Flexible Content Management System


Questions That Need Answers

Contributed by on Aug 23, 2002 - 01:38 AM

I will state it for the record now that my contributions to the post nuke project have been few and far between. What development I have done has been on a purely personal level for various websites I have created.

The question I bring before the council is this. Is all the current change actually required?

Having worked in IT for many years I see what is happening right now as a very bad sign. I've seen this happen before, the change of power, the change of perception, the change of ideas, all culminating in the downfall of a project. For the moment, what we know has been hidden behind smoke and mirrors, for all we have seen is a "revamped" website, a much needed forum improvement, and a change of leadership with promisses of new information forth comming.

Do we have to do all this?

For really we need to ask rather is what is a CMS. Are we now developing a "Community Management System"? or rather a "Content Management System"?

From reading the old "vision" which was put down in writing after the creationg of the post nuke project, it would appear at this stage we should be looking at the following items:

A revamp of how content is presented, allowing greater control over placement, organization, language control, and future compliance.

A revamp of how content is managed and displayed, resulting in the clear definition of the "Sections", "Reviews", and "Articles" areas, improving how HTML is handled, providing improved organization and more flexibility in presentation, and ensuring that the content can be more then just a simple "BLOG".

A basic pass through of all "Core" modules to ensure compliance with the pnAPI and that their output is being passed to the proper functions so that display designers can work w/o fear of a core module not displaying properly.

Yet oddly enough, though it is written this work is either being done behind the scenes, with very little coverage to the public, or rather it is not being done at all, rather being stoped and hindered to permit this change of office.

From the outward apperance, the new "core" group now wish to turn this "Content Management System" into a community management system. Why?

An older man then myself once told me this on my first day at work. "It is a fool who believes that they are good at all things, when infact they are truly good at none." and I see that ever more prevalent here. The "Core" team has done excellent work. They have provided the postnuke project with a solid BLOG interface, they have provided those among the community with the ability to create programs that interface with their project and provide extra functionality, and have left the new management with a stable, functional product.

Thus I ask again, Council and Public, What are we building? Do we build now, from this point, a "community management system" or rather a "content management system" as was written in the beginning?

And if we are not changing our views from the original ideas, then why all the extra work to turn something which works, into something different, when we could be improving on the product rather then the presentation.

Just my 2 cents.