forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Crossley <>
Subject Re: [RT] A new Forrest implementation?
Date Wed, 23 Aug 2006 01:48:28 GMT
Sjur Moshagen wrote:
> CFAS Webmaster:
> >David Crossley wrote:
> >>Why would such people be using Forrest? If they only
> >>want simple websites, then there are plenty of other
> >>tools out there.
> >
> >Speaking for myself, as a user of Forrest for just such a purpose,  
> >I can say that it fits my needs rather well.  I wanted an easy-to- 
> >use application that accepts many different formats and produces a  
> >nicely skinned website.  In particular, I wanted something that was  
> >open-source, not specific to Windows and would be something that  
> >could be used by my eventual successor without extensive training  
> >to keep the current format.
> >
> >While Forrest does not match perfectly, it is the best fit for my  
> >needs that I've been able to find.
> This is pretty close to my findings as well. When I started to use  
> Forrest, I wanted the same:
> - open source
> - not Windows-bound
> - XML as main input, but also other input formats (we use the wiki  
> input module extensively)
> - several output options
> - focus on content after the initial setup
> And in addition:
> - i18n
> - Unicode support
> There are other packages out there, but they all seemed more clumsy  
> or complex than Forrest. I had already played with Cocoon a bit, and  
> liked the sitemap construct.
> I don't like the thought of loosing Cocoon, I don't mind the "bloat",  
> and I can do what I need to using mainly XML. If everything turned  
> Java as a prerequisite for doing more complex things than writing XML  
> documents, as was suggested in earlier posts in this thread (IIUC),  
> that would probably be my goodbye to Forrest.

Fanstastic. The responses from Sjur and Paul are exactly
what we needed to hear. Thanks. You help to set the
development direction.


View raw message