Is this bad practice for clients....

[eluser]Jay Logan[/eluser]
Sometimes I get clients who want a simple web site. By simple I mean a straightforward site with 5 or 6 pages. No forms, no database, nothing "fancy". Is it wrong of me to still use CodeIgniter for these sites? I do it in case they ever decide to upgrade the site with me, I will have the framework already running. But it could also be seen as a sneaky way of securing future work. So that the client can't go in and easily modify any of their pages or have another non-CI developer go in and mess with anything. And some say it's simply overkill. Your thoughts?

[eluser]AgentPhoenix[/eluser]
I don't think it's sneaky. All the client needs to know if they want to edit stuff themselves is to use the views folder. If they know that, there's not much difference. Like you said too, it gives them a launching pad for future enhancements too, whether it's you doing the work or someone else.

[eluser]heavenquake[/eluser]
Using CodeIgniter for these kinds of purposes isn't overkill at all. First and foremost, CI has incredible speed, so there's no added bloat. Secondly, for this kind of static content, the CI-cache is almost perfect.

Lastly, as you mention, it will give you/others the possibility to quickly add dynamic functionality to the system without having to reeinvent the wheel or porting everything to a framework.

[eluser]Jay Logan[/eluser]
Yeah but sometimes it's not as simple as editing a view. I use a layout library which lets me add a wrap a layout around whatever is in the view file. And sometimes routing may be necessary for a site like www.site.com/services/web_design.html etc.

But I guess it is still relatively easy to modify. One of these days I'll just make a very lightweight CMS to package for these clients. Something I can scale for every clients needs.

[eluser]ascotan[/eluser]
Having worked on a number of web projects myself I do think CI is overkill for some projects.
Don't get me wrong, I love working with CI, but there are certain projects that simply work better using COTS software. For instance, I've had people ask me for what is basically a blog site that they can administer. Why not setup and skin wordpress for them??

Some of the big reasons to go with a CMS or some other predefined solution (EE for example) would be possibly a combination of the below factors:
1. Time constraints. It needs to get done so soon that custom development isn't an option.
2. End-User Administration. The big win for CMS's is that the end-user can administer his own site. Many CMS's (like textpattern) allow you to skin the admin screens as well.
3. Simple component-ized requirements. Photo gallery. Bulletin Board. Blog. There are about a million solution to these problems, few of which entail you sitting down and writing your own home-brew blog in a month. Go with what has already out there. Many COTS software include these kind of components.

If the end-user of what your building doesn't really care and just wants a skinned blog that they can administer, then yes, CI is overkill.

That being said, there are reasons for going with a framework like CI.

1. You want to integrate some customized tools. For instance, an events calendar that is very specific to what the end-user wants. If you know your going to have to fool with the 'plugin' api for a CMS - it's better to run with CI.
2. You will end up being the admin for the site, or you need a customized admin interface.
3. You know that the project will evolve and develop overtime. CI is small and simple and is hackable when needed. If you need to hack on a CMS - forget it.

It boils down to user requirements. If you can get away with Joomla, Textpattern, Wordpress (or even EE) then do it. If you do alot of site building, you might sit down and invest in building your own "CMS"-ish skeleton from CI so you get the best of both worlds and can get a site up and running in no time.

[eluser]heavenquake[/eluser]
I don't believe there is a reason to talk CI vs CMS.

CI can be used to create a fine CMS. ExpressionEngine for example. PyroCMS is in beta2, so that could be a viable open source solution in the future, for those kinds of projects.

[eluser]useeme_p[/eluser]
I know this is a old month old thread. but I have been looking at CI for several month actually started using it back in Feb 2010. I must say that my primary goal moving forward is to use CI for 90% of my projects even for basic sites. Because once you know the basic of the framework , getting the job done is faster. A like what AgentPhoenix said about just telling the client to edit the files in the views folder or even creating a cms yourself for them.

good points from everyone ..

[eluser]shershen08[/eluser]
as to me for SUCH small sites, where realy nothing except 5-6 pages and contact for i use pluck cms it's VERY simple and it doesn't use DB at all, becides you can find pretty big pack of simple templates for it