3 ms·
That seems like a different notion from the one presented in the article was my point. I agree with what you've written, you should stick to what you can build
by ohashi 17y ago
That seems like a different notion from the one presented in the article was my point. I agree with what you've written, you should stick to what you can build it most efficiently in. However the article had a section:
>"Write your own CMS. I would have totally disagreed with this advice up until last week or so, but Thomas convinced me: writing a single-purpose CMS is pretty much the new Hello World for modern web frameworks (heck, it is the official Rails demo), and with a man-week or two you can make something much more productive for your purposes than using, e.g., Wordpress. (Though if you can do whatever functionality you need as a Wordpress plugin, I’d still be inclined to suggest that. No need to reinvent the wheel for basic CRUD operations on textual content, or HTML parsing.)"
My argument is that within the existing CMS options it's almost always easier to just create a module to add the functionality rather than trying to create your own CMS. I work with Drupal as you stated and it's pretty open to what can be done with it and quite easy to add almost any functionality I want. So the quoted piece from the text is a bit confusing from the article.