forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Turner <>
Subject Re: Where is the line betweenForrest and a CMS (Re: vague issues with Forrest use)
Date Wed, 09 Nov 2005 00:52:17 GMT
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 08:33:48PM +0000, Ross Gardler wrote:
> Paul Bolger wrote:
> > So, what is the function of site.xml, if it's not to do the above? 
> Please be careful with your snipping of mails. The above sentence is 
> meaningless in the context of the archives. I've made it worse by moving 
> this to a new thread (something we should have done as soon as we 
> started discussing this aspect of the original thread).
> First let me try to bring some context back for archive readers:
> This discussion has been exploring ways of making Forrest easier for new 
> users. One suggestion is to provide an interface to manage the site.xml 
> file. My own response to this suggestion is that Forrest is an XML 
> publishing framework and not a CMS. It should not concern itself with 
> how the site structure is managed, only with how it is used to publish 
> the content. I suggest that we should focus on integration with CMS 
> systems, which are responsible for the management of content. This is 
> about where we have got to so far.

I'm very glad this perspective of Forrest is alive and well.

Most documentation systems out there take it upon themselves to
'manage' docs - to be responsible for their storage (in an opaque,
ungreppable DB), editing (through an annoying WYSIWYG editor),
versioning and moving (through clunky web UIs).  I can do all that
myself! I LIKE being able to use Subversion or CVS to store docs, to
version docs when and how I like, to use vim or emacs to edit text.  On
the output site, I like being able to generate static HTML which can be
themed with Sitemesh and served with any appserver.

Forrest does _just_ the rendering and lets me do the rest how I want to.
There are precious few systems that do this little, and I hope Forrest
never falls for the "we need to become a CMS to be easy to use" argument.


View raw message