Open Source CMS Systems

Review of Content Management Systems - Section 2, Open Source Systems

2.0 Open Source CMS's

2.1 History

Open source CMS systems appear attractive since they are free (except in terms of support) and they appear to come with a rich selection of functional modules. There are many (too many) of them, most derived or copied from Slashdot or PhpNuke.

PhpNuke and its derivatives are sometime referred certainly to as slashclones - software packages designed to run sites that end up looking by default very much like the wildly successful tech-news site Slashdot (but ported to php). This model is adaptable to things that look much more like content that you want to manage (Ref: Mike Sugarbaker article) .

BUT the slashdot and the phpNuke derivatives by and large share various features:

• Designed by techies for use by techies
• Not very end user friendly for the person in the street
• Rudimentary if any workflow for content management
• Rudimentary content hierarchy
• Can give better support for community software (such as discussion groups) than commercial CMS's
• Often non existent or poor support for "Sub-sites" or multiple roles and authors.

2.2 Short List

2.2.1 PhpNuke

This was the original php version, coded initially by Francisco Burzi in three weeks. But there have been a dozen or more break-aways (forks), some citing personality and control issues, plus a perceived undisciplined approach to bug tracking and testing.

Update August 2005: PhpNuke has now gone horribly commercial, complete with popups!

2.2.2 PostNuke

The most significant breakaway from phpNuke was PostNuke (as used in www.BYM2002.org.uk/index.php, since de-activated). But PostNuke itself then suffered from personality clashes and policy disagreements. The code base has become unmaintainable, with each new version introducing almost as many bugs as it fixed. The original PostNuke is limping along, but seems to have lost momentum and not to have any significant vision.

There have been three significant breakaways from PostNuke: Envolution, Xaraya and Xoops (see below). Most took the view that a redesign from the ground up was called for, one difference being that Envolution continued to maintain the PostNuke code and an upgrade path pending their new release whilst others did not. Both Envolution and Xaraya now have betas available, that look promising, but neither yet (May 2003) has even the full set of functional modules that PostNuke had, let alone the "missing" CMS functionality. 

Most of the breakaways are so busy re-coding the core code that they have not really addressed the functional points listed above.

2.2.3 EnvolutionFR

While EnvolutionFR was a fork of PostNuke, the entire core of the product is or has been replaced and improved, making it far more secure and stable, and able to work in high-volume environments with ease.

"EnvolutionFR is a framework from which to build ERP/CRM/CMS solutions. To use EnvolutionFR as a traditional Web Content Management System you will need to utilize our Publisher application module. Publisher allows you to dynamically create many kinds of content not just articles. Content such as tutorials, reviews, blog posts, etc are all possible. Read on for more information regarding the new EnvolutionFR."

Xaraya is an extensible, Open Source web application framework written in PHP and licensed under the GNU General Public License. Xaraya claims to deliver the requisite infrastructure and tools to create custom web applications that include fully dynamic multi-platform Content Management Solutions (CMS).

Xaraya's modular, database independent architecture introduces tools that separate form, function, content, and design with on-the-fly extensions allowing greater control and versatility.

2.2.5 Xoops

XOOPS is a dynamic OO (Object Oriented) based open source portal script written in PHP and currently using MySQL. Xoops is an ideal tool for developing small to large dynamic community websites, intra company portals, corporate portals, weblogs and much more.

XOOPS includes a good integrated forum, but it seems they have not yet implemented professional content management with workflow etc (as opposed to News Stories). Xoops is probably the best of the bunch for pure "community" support with, eg: the ability to search for users by various criteria and send email and private messages to users through a template-based messaging system, There is an integrated Wiki.

Other Open Source CMS

2.2.6 Mambo

From a review: "The best parts about Mambo are 1) its orientation towards distributing information and managing content (rather than focusing on reader opinions or an "online community"), 2) ease of use including setup and administration, 3) customizable architecture, 4) good administrative interface, and 5) publishing workflow including security. Many sites want to accept articles from contributors (users) but with the ability to review and edit them before publishing. The publishing workflow in Mambo makes this not only possible, but automated and easy. My biggest complaint is the rather superficial implementation of site-subsections."

Mambo was used successfully for the QBL2002 site

Update August 2005: There seems to have been an outbreak of politics, with the development team resigning over a split involving control and ownership issues. How this will resolve is not yet clear.

2.2.7  Zope and Plone

Plone and Zope are "different" from all the other products discussed. Zope itself is an open source application server for building content management systems, intranets, portals, and custom applications. It is an integrated object based development environment with its own web server and database, though it can run on Apache or MSIE. Plone is an integrated CMS built on and for Zope.

These systems are very powerful, but have a steep learning curve. The default style themes tend to be fine for Techie users, but not the best in usability terms for casual users, and it is by no means easy determining how to change them.

You either love or loath them.

2.3 Open Source Table

2.4 Other Open Source Systems

There are in fact many other slashdot and phpNuke derivatives, most sharing certain characteristics in varying degrees, see CMS Product Directories:

2.4.1 Common Pros

1. Good for news articles or stories.
2. Good for user interaction and community support (except that Friends may not be ready yet to use them properly)
3. Good wide range of standard functional modules with a consistent look and feel, both for users and administration. These include Downloads, Reviews, FAQ etc etc.
4. Wide range of third party functional modules.
5. Tailorable visual themes
6. Wide range of excellent integrated Discussion Groups, including versions of phpBB, Arena, SuperBB (ex Cyboards)
7. Database abstraction layer (PHP-ADODB Compliant).
8. Integrated navigation
9. Integrated user database (though not particularly accessible without coding).

2.4.2 Common Cons

1. Dodgy code base, unless re-written in which case most systems are not yet mature enough, except possibly Xoops and Mamba.
2. Weak content management, tends to be missing (Note BYM2002 uses Content Express module, which is just adequate but not suitable for big time use in  BYM).:
3. Permissions hard to use.
4. Multi-site operation hard to set up.

2.4.3 Sample phpNuke based CMSs (Discarded)

(See opensourceCMS for the definitive list)

Some of these seem to have taken the Open Source Nuke clone code, tidied it up and added their own proprietary extension modules or services. The purists decry this, but the suppliers are just trying to make a living.

2.4.4 Quote from FreeWPS:

"After more than a year of hard work on the base product, the focus of the FreeWPS team has shifted to add-in modules, five of which have been completed in time for the formal release of FreeWPS."

Which says it all really! Do we really want to Do It Ourselves?

2.5 Conclusion on Open Source Systems

Most of the Open Source systems are strong on "community" sites, with news and Forums, but weak on Content Management. But Friends have (yet) to take to heavy on-line community in a significant way.

The best of the bunch are Xoops (for excellent community support) or Mambo (for good enough community support and better CMS workflow). Either would do for a simple site, but neither quite makes it for the full BYM requirements. We need corporate content management with full permissions, workflow, version control etc etc. [Mambo has this, but not with the full multi-site and multi-section support needed eg for BYM].

And then there is Zope / Plone, which could for the basis of a self-development system. But do we really want to go there?

So it may be time to move on from the Open Source systems, unless there is something I have missed, although some of the newer re-writes may get there eventually,

Low End Commercial CMS Systems

Site design Copyright © 2005 Ellipse Services