Slashdot Mirror

Bricolage had a command-line SOAP utility in 2002:

http://viewsvn.bricolage.cc/bricolage/trunk/bin/bric_soap?view=log

I've been using such a command called bric_soap in Bricolage (Perl-based CMS) for the last six years at least.

Introduced in 2002: ViewVC

An example (see the API docs, navigate to bin -> bric_soap ...): "Republish all published stories. This is useful when a template change needs to be reflected across a site. The sort -k2 -t_ -n is a crude way to make sure that newer stories overwrite older ones."

bric_soap story list_ids --search publish_status=1 | sort -k2 -t_ -n | bric_soap workflow publish -

I've been using such a command called bric_soap in Bricolage (Perl-based CMS) for the last six years at least.

Introduced in 2002: ViewVC

An example (see the API docs, navigate to bin -> bric_soap ...): "Republish all published stories. This is useful when a template change needs to be reflected across a site. The sort -k2 -t_ -n is a crude way to make sure that newer stories overwrite older ones."

bric_soap story list_ids --search publish_status=1 | sort -k2 -t_ -n | bric_soap workflow publish -

I've been using such a command called bric_soap in Bricolage (Perl-based CMS) for the last six years at least.

Introduced in 2002: ViewVC

An example (see the API docs, navigate to bin -> bric_soap ...): "Republish all published stories. This is useful when a template change needs to be reflected across a site. The sort -k2 -t_ -n is a crude way to make sure that newer stories overwrite older ones."

bric_soap story list_ids --search publish_status=1 | sort -k2 -t_ -n | bric_soap workflow publish -

Try Bricolage.

Yup. Try Bricolage. It doesn't have any default templates at all, really, and it can be kind of a bear to set up, but it's amazingly powerful.

Bricolage has a lot of what you're looking for, and it's very well built.

Here is a good intro to what it is and how it works.

Sounds like Bricolage or Krang would be pretty close to prefect for you.

Bricolage is a mod_perl-based CMS which is currently (as it happens) being worked on by 4 GSoCers. It's hard to set up at first, but is powerful and flexible.

Unfortunately, the Register does not use Bricolage. You can find a reasonably comprehensive list of the sites that use Bricolage on the Bricolage Sites page.

--Theory

Here are some sites created with Bricolage.

here.

Maybe the screenshots will give you a better idea.. I never seem to know what the heck these marketing briefs are talking about either, but as soon as I see some proper screenshots I can wrap my head around it. Like in this case where you see the screenshots and quicky see that it's just an app that help them write news stories to publish on the Web.

Bricolage

Used by Salon, MacWorld, etc.

I started working with it for a newspaper website. It's solid, configurable and very open to design.

Dreamweaver is an impressive behemoth of a tool, no doubt whatsoever. Back in 1999/2000 it was the only possible way to edit and manage websites on a professional level. Dreamweavers wysiwyg power with the older browsers and it's HTML editing features are unmatched. The template engine completely abstracts changes to a website in your developement directory and automatically keeps track of anything you what across multiple documents. If DW doesn't crash and screw up your template dir that is - which does happen more often than you like. It's the best thing you can use ... ...if you don't have a CMS.
Which gets me right to the point:
Sorry, but it's like five years since the early dot-bomb days where dynamic server side stuff was considered exotic and people got payed for klicking static websites together. You may haven't noticed, but the world has moved on. There are something like fifteen bazillion open source content management systems out there. One better than the next.
Who the fuck needs DW nowadays? You don't want DW! DWs concepts are ancient by todays standards. The last time I used it was about 4 years ago in some project where the system team couldn't get their stuff together and set up a halfway decent JSP framework and we had to hack the webdocs by hand in record time. And my web productivity has tripled by now, since I exclusively use content management systems (as every body else does), and be it "only" to generate the html docs offline and publish the output to static webspace.

Honestly now: Ditch DW allready, it's nothing but a huge waste of time these days. Trust me, I make a living with this stuff. And take a look at one of the frameworks above. To save your time, I recommend checking out one of the following: Plone/Zope, Callisto CMS, Mambo, Typo3, Mason, Slashcode, or (forgot this one above) Xoops. Save yourself half to three quarters of webdev time in the long run.
Oh, and welcome to 2005. ;-)

The Register uses Bricolage, a content management system written with Mason, a mod_perl application. It's a bit of a stack, but it works good.

Paul, do you have any real world experience with openCMS?

Yes, quite a lot. I have been using it since Jan., 2003, nearly two years.

It seems [as if it were] the only other open source CMS that can publish out pages via FTP. Or maybe I [am] reading the features wrong.

I am not sure that OpenCMS (version 5.01, the current production release) can publish pages via FTP, but at least one open source CMS has this feature built-in: Bricolage, which is designed for use by newspapers and magazines. Bricolage is an excellent CMS, but it has a huge disadvantage: it is difficult to install and administer, even if you are installing it as a Debian package.

In OpenCMS, publishing is not called "publishing," but, rather, "static export." In the CMS field, this process of converting content (that lives in the RDBMS) into static HTML is often called "baking," which stands in contrast to "frying," serving content directly from the RDBMS without first converting it into static HTML.

I have been scared off a bit by my lack of Java skills.

Yes, knowing how to program in Java (JSP, at the very least) and how to administer a servlet container (e.g., Tomcat or Jetty) are both important skills if you want to experiment with OpenCMS. You do not need to be a Java expert, but, at the very least, you need to know (or be able to learn) JSP. And the more Java that you know, the more that you can do with OpenCMS.

simple<------------------>flexible

Some open source CMSs that focus on content over community:
Magnolia - just released version 2, Java-based, fantastic content element dialog creation.
Etomite - I am using this currently for a medium-sized business site. Nice addition of HTMLarea, still missing a few features but has the brightest future of the PHP CMSs.
Bricolage - the only open-source CMS I have seen that will publish, that is, the CMS server is completely seperate from the web server, which is how it should be. Has great content element modeling so pages can be broken down to individual elements.

• who your content-providers are and their technology strengths (and tolerance levels!!)
• who your end-user community is and how "involved" they will be in the site (forums? community-driven content? story submission? ...) [don't get caught in the "needed feature" vs. "cool factor" trap!]
• who your admins are and their technical strengths/weaknesses (are these the same people who will be configuring the system? are they coders or do they only work from white-books and red-books ?, etc...)
• how much time is devoted to adminstration of the system?
• a single look-and-feel template for the whole site or different sections get their own template(s)?
• do you want to separate development, test and production?
• how much time is devoted to enhancing the system?
• what skillsets are available for enhancing the system?

We don't want to have users "logging in" to our company website. We don't need/want forums/blogs/galleries. We need a simple-to-use content-provider interface for people with little-to-no webskills. We want separate servers for development, testing and production. We have a very skilled set of admins, but they don't want to be tweaking the system every day.

Based on our evaluation period, we believe we are going forward with Bricolage. It is not an easy system to get into, but its power and flexibility is fantastic and it has a fairly supportive community.

For a perl CMS, try Bricolage.

Let's not forget that the folks at Salon use and develop the open source CMS system Bricolage (homepage, Salon tech notes on their choice, Linux Journal article, Another).

They're not exactly the bad guys around here.

For other institutions considering implementing their own "opencourseware" there are several open-source CMS options. At this point, MIT OCW is monitoring six: Zope, Red Hat, Midgard, OpenACS, OpenCMS, and Bricolage. By 2004, most experts agree that one CMS provider will become the clear, open-source leader in this industry sector. MIT OCW will track the progress of key open-source CMS providers during this accelerated maturation. This will contribute to MIT being able to share its experience and understanding of these CMS options with other institutions. The hope is that utilization of open-source model CMS products could lead to less expensive implementations of opencoursewares on other campuses.

i havent used it myself, but i hear bricolage is quite an amazing content management system complete with workflow, etc etc

http://bricolage.cc/

Dave Wheeler worked on the original Salon code, which has since become Bricolage, a generally well regarded CMS (in fact lauded by eWeek as "Most Impressive" of 2002

You might try using Bricolage. It's open source, based on mod_perl and Mason, and it seems like it would do most of what you're looking for.

I'm not interested in a language war, but your take on what CGI.pm is for is a little off. If you want to "talk CGI" (which is a very simple protocol for communicating with the Web server and ultimately with a client), you use CGI.pm to do so.

If you want to dynamically generate content for the Web, you use Bricolage, Slash or any of the other fine packages out there. Bricolage is especially nice, as it is based on HTML::Mason, a very nice templating system for HTML. Slash, you may know from some of the sites that were built with it....

You can find a nice bit of discussion on the topic, here.

Of course, if you just want to give up on Perl because you ran across CGI.pm and thought it was ugly, that's fine too.