CMS in CI

[eluser]llbbl[/eluser]
Yes but we don't need CMS function that calls a CI function that calls the PHP mail() function. It should be coded so it makes sense and is fast!

I don't know how far along Elliot's project is. Also I am not so sure why people really need a CMS in the first place. CI already has the tools to build a site with. Isn't making a CMS out of it a mute point? I mean I guess for the times when your not getting paid to make a site, and you don't really give a crap, it might be nice.

I am wondering what are the stated project goals. How is going to be better than the current champion, Drupal?

[eluser]Sarfaraz Momin[/eluser]
Hi,
I still do not see any reason why a person needs a CMS when CI gives you the flexibility to make one fast and easy. Before starting to work on the CMS I made using CI. I had never worked on it. I remember David ( the creator or ROR) say that the best way to learn something is to start working on a live project using it and then you know where it lacks and what power it gives you. I found some shortcomings in CI but I still feel that those are just the way the CI developers think. Thats the reason i said that a CMS will depend on individual needs. 'llbbl' You have a real bad perception about ROR. I have been working with PHP for about 5 years now and it just took me 2 days to get used to Rails as Ruby is a fun language to learn and implement. I am already working on a project and would love to do some more in Ruby if the client gives the flexibility to choose the platform to develop and do not insist on PHP / MYSQL. And for your info ROR does not just give you few things which are cool. Its every thing in ROR thats cool. I got forums saying ROR is slow since it converts the tables in the database into objects and properties. But the project I am working on gives me blazing results. Faster than PHP 4 and slightly faster than PHP 5 without any caching both PHP. I know if I use any caching system. PHP would win hands on. Am also started to see DJANGO a lot these days as that looks a cool thing.

But all in all....

CI ROCKS !!!!!

[eluser]xwero[/eluser]
You are not forced to use any cms that is build on CI if you don't want to. I'm not sure why this discussion gets so heated.
A lot of people want to give the possibility to their clients to make and adjust their own pages. And it looks like there is a bunch of people that discover php through CI so if there is (barebone) cms they can add to CI where they can play with maybe more people will be attracted to CI.
Instead of the 10 minute blog tutorial you could have the 2 minute cms tutorial for blogs and other user driven sites by the people who maintain the cms of course.

I think having applications/components build on CI is not a shame. I'm currently are making a human to sql function, will people use it? I don't know but looks like a fun thing to do and if people use it all the better.

[eluser]easylancer[/eluser]
I would like some information pertaining to CMS, i have made most of the backend, but to make the frontend i am having trouble, as i need to make it customizable and able to use template. Can someone direct me in how i would impliment the front end. I originally created a controller caller front and made it load view called front. There is also a model which processes all database actions.

[eluser]Sarfaraz Momin[/eluser]
Hi,
You are very correct XWERO about the need of community CMS on top of CI. Let hope something good come out in ignitedCMS. I might need some suggestions and lots of help in starting this project and getting it to work.

Well as far as EASYLANCER is concerned. I have around 6 sites running on CI right now out of which there are couple of high traffic sites and I do not use views. Instead what I do is use the parser library to parse templates but just with a little difference. I modified the parser library to use variables instead of views. So I directly pull templates from the DB and parse it with appropriate data and output them to the browser. I use eaccelerator which makes the performance quite good. I think this is a way you can do but i do not know weather this is a best way or not. I have a site with around 75K uniques and some 160K page views running on CI and it works gr8. So i can suggest this.

Good Day !!!

[eluser]esra[/eluser]
[quote author="llbbl" date="1194589959"]I don't know how far along Elliot's project is. Also I am not so sure why people really need a CMS in the first place. CI already has the tools to build a site with. Isn't making a CMS out of it a mute point? I mean I guess for the times when your not getting paid to make a site, and you don't really give a crap, it might be nice.

I am wondering what are the stated project goals. How is going to be better than the current champion, Drupal?[/quote]

The thread author wants to build a CMS based on CI. Most of us know this is possible. However, a CMS is a Content Management System. Most CMS applications (including Drupal, Joomla, Mambo, Postnuke, Xaraya, etc.) are actually built on top of a portal-like framework. The portal itself should be thought of as a foundation for building applications on top of a low-level framework like CI. The major distinction between the portal extensions and framework are the development on a base set of reusable modules that are common among most application types. A portal (what most people refer to as a CMS) could be used to build any kind of application. Supporting Content could be handled using a single Admin module and multiple frontend modules (e.g., blog, article, news, faq, tutorial, etc.).

For a portal, using Modular Separation gives MVC much better encapsulation and more controllable decoupling of application modules. This is an area where MVC 2 is sadly lacking largely because of Sun's Model 2 (MVC 2) implmentation of MVC. The original SmallTalk MVC framework was designed for a typed language where something like dynamic link libraries could be used to create module-like entities.