Thread: http://techdocs.postgresql.org/v2
Hi all, I just rediscovered Justin's test Plone site (which wasn't working well when I tried it before). Despite is being only there for testing it now seems to have nearly 500 users and appears to work quite well now. The only problems I found are: - The calendar on the right which seemed to have no purpose other than to make site indexers get in a mess. - I think the user 'levels' need work. At present, everyone seems to be a member (even Justin) and able to edit anything, even the site configuration. I think if this site were to be used for techdocs permanently, normal users should not be able to add or edit documents (only add comments etc), with higher lever users being able to create and edit documents with higher still managing the site config etc. What do the rest of you think about this site? Regards, Dave.
Guys,
> > > was kind of my thinking as well, which was why i started
> > > leaning toward using openacs. however I think josh's main
> > > requirements were simply to have the
> > > ability to publish articles without having to resort to
> > > handcoding html.
> > > ISTM user comments were secondary to him.
And one other thing, based on the requirements of some of our community
writers; there needs to be some ability to add "locked" content. For
example, if I republish my article from Linux Magazine (due out in 2 weeks,
yah!) it has to go up as "locked" content with a shared copyright. I can't
have people modifying it per my agreement with Linux Magazine.
Also, most mature Wiki systems allow user comments. This is a non-issue.
> I just rediscovered Justin's test Plone site (which wasn't working well
> when I tried it before). Despite is being only there for testing it now
> seems to have nearly 500 users and appears to work quite well now.
>
> What do the rest of you think about this site?
Justin's and my problem with Plone was that is was intolerably slow on updates
and administrative interfaces; some of the admin screens took over a minute
just to load. And this was with just him, me & Elein on it.
Also, the plone "look" says "Plone" not "PostgreSQL". However, if it gets
something up and running in a hurry, I can certainly live with that.
If we've got it performing better now, it's worth a 2nd look.
--
-Josh Berkus
______AGLIO DATABASE SOLUTIONS___________________________
Josh Berkus
Complete information technology josh@agliodbs.com
and data management solutions (415) 565-7293
for law firms, small businesses fax 621-2533
and non-profit organizations. San Francisco
> -----Original Message----- > From: Josh Berkus [mailto:josh@agliodbs.com] > Sent: 16 January 2004 21:40 > To: Dave Page; PostgreSQL Web Development Mailing List > Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] http://techdocs.postgresql.org/v2 > > Justin's and my problem with Plone was that is was > intolerably slow on updates and administrative interfaces; > some of the admin screens took over a minute > just to load. And this was with just him, me & Elein on it. The only really noticable speed issues I saw whilst playing were local network issues. I editted one page and it certainly wasn't noticably slower than our other php admin interface. > > Also, the plone "look" says "Plone" not "PostgreSQL". > However, if it gets > something up and running in a hurry, I can certainly live with that. > > If we've got it performing better now, it's worth a 2nd look. I think so. It looks nice, and seems quite usable and maintainable. Like I said, the only real issues I noticed were the lack of access controls (users should not be able to modify config nor (imho) content) and the seemingly useless calendar (is that some kind of 'see this folder how it was on xx-xx-xxxx' control?) Regards, Dave.
Dave, > The only really noticable speed issues I saw whilst playing were local > network issues. I editted one page and it certainly wasn't noticably > slower than our other php admin interface. OK. Do we want to give it a try? I would eliminate one item I've been procrastinating on for some time, and I'd be happy to relieve Robert of any Techdocs maint based on Plone. -- -Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
On Fri, 16 Jan 2004, Josh Berkus wrote: > Dave, > > > The only really noticable speed issues I saw whilst playing were local > > network issues. I editted one page and it certainly wasn't noticably > > slower than our other php admin interface. > > OK. Do we want to give it a try? I would eliminate one item I've been > procrastinating on for some time, and I'd be happy to relieve Robert of any > Techdocs maint based on Plone. 'k, is this replacing techdocs, or just part of techdocs? ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
On Friday 16 January 2004 17:16, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Jan 2004, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > Dave,
> >
> > > The only really noticable speed issues I saw whilst playing were local
> > > network issues. I editted one page and it certainly wasn't noticably
> > > slower than our other php admin interface.
> >
> > OK. Do we want to give it a try? I would eliminate one item I've been
> > procrastinating on for some time, and I'd be happy to relieve Robert of
> > any Techdocs maint based on Plone.
>
> 'k, is this replacing techdocs, or just part of techdocs?
>
If we're going to do it, we need to replace the whole thing IMO.
Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
> -----Original Message----- > From: Marc G. Fournier [mailto:scrappy@postgresql.org] > Sent: 16 January 2004 22:17 > To: Josh Berkus > Cc: Dave Page; PostgreSQL Web Development Mailing List > Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] http://techdocs.postgresql.org/v2 > > On Fri, 16 Jan 2004, Josh Berkus wrote: > > > Dave, > > > > > The only really noticable speed issues I saw whilst playing were > > > local network issues. I editted one page and it certainly wasn't > > > noticably slower than our other php admin interface. > > > > OK. Do we want to give it a try? I would eliminate one > item I've been > > procrastinating on for some time, and I'd be happy to > relieve Robert > > of any Techdocs maint based on Plone. > > 'k, is this replacing techdocs, or just part of techdocs? All of it I think. Steve, what do you think? Regards, Dave.
Robert Treat said: > On Friday 16 January 2004 17:16, Marc G. Fournier wrote: >> On Fri, 16 Jan 2004, Josh Berkus wrote: >> > Dave, >> > >> > > The only really noticable speed issues I saw whilst playing were local >> > > network issues. I editted one page and it certainly wasn't noticably >> > > slower than our other php admin interface. The site seems a little slow to me -- it took five seconds to bring up the home page, compared to two for the postgresql.org home page. Not terrible, but noticeable. >> > OK. Do we want to give it a try? I would eliminate one item I've been >> > procrastinating on for some time, and I'd be happy to relieve Robert of >> > any Techdocs maint based on Plone. The structured text aspect of plone seems to be a bit iffy to me. In particular, it looks like there's a *lot* of indenting involved based on their description of it (http://plone.org/documentation/book/10). Other concerns: - Inline preformatted text is done with apostrophes. This seems prone to accidents, particularly if you try to use SQL inline. - It *looks* like you can only do preformatted text if the preceding paragraph ends in a colon (which needs to be doubled). - It replaces HTML with another formatting language. It attempts to be simpler, but I'm not sure if it succeeds. A good test would be to take an article that has a fair number of SQL examples in it, and port it to plone's format. If this were done by someone who's already written articles (and might do so again) -- I'm thinking of Josh, that would be particularly helpful. >> 'k, is this replacing techdocs, or just part of techdocs? > > If we're going to do it, we need to replace the whole thing IMO. I agree. We don't need to add another method of storage/delivery if we can avoid it. As of last night, I have Bricolage installed on a server, and am now attempting to figure out how to use it (not very obvious). As far as I can tell, it publishes plain HTML to any number of servers, without needing anything special running on the destination web server, so it'll be hard to beat that for speed. It also allows for writing, editing, approving and publishing as separate steps (the last two might be combined). From a content writer's perspective, it looks pretty simple. I'm guessing that the initial setup is going to be the worst part of it. That's about all I can tell you at the moment, however. I'm not sure how formatting works, or internationalization. Should I keep looking at this, or move to plone instead? Steve Simms Database Developer & Administrator Medical Media Systems, Inc.
On Saturday 17 January 2004 09:55, Steve Simms wrote:
> Robert Treat said:
>
> Should I keep looking at this, or move to plone instead?
>
IMO keep looking at it.
Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL