5 ms·

so what are the alternatives with good code and features ?

by boundlessdreamz 17y ago

chaosmachine 17y ago
Drupal
- ryanwaggoner 17y ago
  Drupal is great for some things, and it's great for a lot more in theory, but it sucks on a lot of levels. The main issues I have with it are a) the admin interface is significantly harder for normal folks to jump in and start using, b) it's really inefficient unless you do some serious tuning, and c) theming is a nightmare. I mean, once you get a theme all up and running, I'm sure it's great because it's easy to edit, but the task of converting an HTML mockup to a full Drupal theme is a huge pain in the ass. I can take an HTML / CSS slice, convert it to a Wordpress theme, throw up a new installation, configure everything the way it should be, add some basic pages and content, and launch the thing in about 90 mins.
  - chaosmachine 17y ago
    The question was about features and code quality, not ease of use. Drupal is harder to learn, but definitely wins on the other two.
    - lamnk 17y ago
      I don't know about code quality but please elaborate on features. Could you name any features of Drupal that Wordpress doesn't have ?
      - thesethings 17y ago
        I can. (And I'm not saying this makes Drupal better than Wordpress, just different. I really like both tools.) Drupal is better suited than WP for each user to be throwing back as much content as they're consuming. When the membership is more "flat," a la YouTube/Flickr/Facebook. (Drupal is kind of notorious for making proof of concept clones of all the major social sites.) Drupal also has hooks for creating "nodes" (a Drupal word for a page, basically), from external DB's, and can create custom content types, with any combination of fields/menus without making the end-user seeing anything ugly (WP also has a custom field type option, but it forces the publisher into a type of Administrator view, whereas in Drupal, you can make the custom content view look as pretty and neat as Twitter submit form, or any interface.) Again, I'm NOT saying Drupal is better than WP, it's just really different. I actually hesitate to compare them. I think Drupal is more similar to Django/Rails. It's a framework, but with an really ugly admin panel, and it's that GUI that makes people compare it to WP, which of course has an incredible admin interface that makes any WP user rightfully wrinkle their nose when first using Drupal :D
        skinnymuch 17y ago
        Nice post and trying to not pick one or the other :P So from what you said...is there any reason for a normal someone not too good at coding to choose Drupal over WP if you're making a site with minimal user interaction? There are a lot of WP plugins to help with turning it into more of a CMS for sites than just a blog so that part can be taken care of.
        thesethings 17y ago
        I can't think of a reason not to choose WP over Drupal for the scenario you're describing. You sound like you're on the right track.
      - chaosmachine 17y ago
        Some of Drupal's best features come in the form of modules (there are over 4000). Some of the most powerful: Dynamic content types (CCK module), Query builder (Views module), Triggers and Actions (Rules module). If you want to explore, take a look at http://drupalmodules.com/ http://drupalmodules.com/
  - patio11 17y ago
    90 mins. What is your secret? Because I can't get one up in 90 minutes even starting with the theme pre-written and automating the deployment as much as I can -- the amount of manual settings for plugins, sidebar widgets, and the like always eats my time.
    - ryanwaggoner 17y ago
      These are for clients who typically only use a couple plugins, usually Akismet and a contact form. So other than the theme stuff, which probably takes about an hour, I'm usually just installing WP, which takes about 3 mins (they're usually using a host that has one-click installation), then I upload the plugins that I use on everything and enable them, which takes another 2-3 mins, then I configure things, which usually means turning on permalinks, changing admin password, and setting up the contact form. Create a "contact us" page, edit the about us page, and I'm pretty much done. The non-theme stuff takes about 30 mins. But these are sites for authors, many of which are new to the idea of blogging, so a lot of complicated plugins and widgets to deal with is too much for them.
    - thesethings 17y ago
      You're not alone. It's not for lack of options, but like many parts of Drupal, the automated install process hasn't "stayed still" for more than a version for the best practices to really evolve. The most famous way is something called Install Profile. The definition and underpinnings of this module have changed drastically from version to version, and it is not that well documented. A more recent entrant is a system called Aegir which is a set of multiple modules. There is also a Drupal shell called Drush that can automate some things, but obviously it itself needs to be present and installed to be utilitzed :D. Myself? I've written an ugly bash script that basically downloads and moves all the modules into place, and talks to mysql to enable them. I would never advise anybody else to use this method, or at least not use my script ;D In a recent Lullabot podcast (probably the most well-known, and definitely most helpful Drupal-based business I know of), they referred to a database-centric way of automating installs that sounded like it could also be just a db script. They promised a blog post, which I am eagerly anticipating. Anyway, your main point about Drupal setup being cumbersome, is true. Most people whose work is all Drupal have ways to deal with this, but if Drupal is only a small part of your computing life, it's not obvious what the best practice is.
- mattdennewitz 17y ago
  i have never, ever, in my short life, worked with worse code than anything done with drupal. some of what i've seen is downright tragic -- completely illegible, inconsistent, goldbergian in design, and (strong words) just plain dumb. and thats being generous.

so what are the alternatives with good code and features ?

chaosmachine 17y ago

Drupal

ryanwaggoner 17y ago
Drupal is great for some things, and it's great for a lot more in theory, but it sucks on a lot of levels. The main issues I have with it are a) the admin interface is significantly harder for normal folks to jump in and start using, b) it's really inefficient unless you do some serious tuning, and c) theming is a nightmare. I mean, once you get a theme all up and running, I'm sure it's great because it's easy to edit, but the task of converting an HTML mockup to a full Drupal theme is a huge pain in the ass. I can take an HTML / CSS slice, convert it to a Wordpress theme, throw up a new installation, configure everything the way it should be, add some basic pages and content, and launch the thing in about 90 mins.
- chaosmachine 17y ago
  The question was about features and code quality, not ease of use. Drupal is harder to learn, but definitely wins on the other two.
  - lamnk 17y ago
    I don't know about code quality but please elaborate on features. Could you name any features of Drupal that Wordpress doesn't have ?
    - thesethings 17y ago
      I can. (And I'm not saying this makes Drupal better than Wordpress, just different. I really like both tools.) Drupal is better suited than WP for each user to be throwing back as much content as they're consuming. When the membership is more "flat," a la YouTube/Flickr/Facebook. (Drupal is kind of notorious for making proof of concept clones of all the major social sites.) Drupal also has hooks for creating "nodes" (a Drupal word for a page, basically), from external DB's, and can create custom content types, with any combination of fields/menus without making the end-user seeing anything ugly (WP also has a custom field type option, but it forces the publisher into a type of Administrator view, whereas in Drupal, you can make the custom content view look as pretty and neat as Twitter submit form, or any interface.) Again, I'm NOT saying Drupal is better than WP, it's just really different. I actually hesitate to compare them. I think Drupal is more similar to Django/Rails. It's a framework, but with an really ugly admin panel, and it's that GUI that makes people compare it to WP, which of course has an incredible admin interface that makes any WP user rightfully wrinkle their nose when first using Drupal :D
      - skinnymuch 17y ago
        Nice post and trying to not pick one or the other :P So from what you said...is there any reason for a normal someone not too good at coding to choose Drupal over WP if you're making a site with minimal user interaction? There are a lot of WP plugins to help with turning it into more of a CMS for sites than just a blog so that part can be taken care of.
        thesethings 17y ago
        I can't think of a reason not to choose WP over Drupal for the scenario you're describing. You sound like you're on the right track.
    - chaosmachine 17y ago
      Some of Drupal's best features come in the form of modules (there are over 4000). Some of the most powerful: Dynamic content types (CCK module), Query builder (Views module), Triggers and Actions (Rules module). If you want to explore, take a look at http://drupalmodules.com/ http://drupalmodules.com/
- patio11 17y ago
  90 mins. What is your secret? Because I can't get one up in 90 minutes even starting with the theme pre-written and automating the deployment as much as I can -- the amount of manual settings for plugins, sidebar widgets, and the like always eats my time.
  - ryanwaggoner 17y ago
    These are for clients who typically only use a couple plugins, usually Akismet and a contact form. So other than the theme stuff, which probably takes about an hour, I'm usually just installing WP, which takes about 3 mins (they're usually using a host that has one-click installation), then I upload the plugins that I use on everything and enable them, which takes another 2-3 mins, then I configure things, which usually means turning on permalinks, changing admin password, and setting up the contact form. Create a "contact us" page, edit the about us page, and I'm pretty much done. The non-theme stuff takes about 30 mins. But these are sites for authors, many of which are new to the idea of blogging, so a lot of complicated plugins and widgets to deal with is too much for them.
  - thesethings 17y ago
    You're not alone. It's not for lack of options, but like many parts of Drupal, the automated install process hasn't "stayed still" for more than a version for the best practices to really evolve. The most famous way is something called Install Profile. The definition and underpinnings of this module have changed drastically from version to version, and it is not that well documented. A more recent entrant is a system called Aegir which is a set of multiple modules. There is also a Drupal shell called Drush that can automate some things, but obviously it itself needs to be present and installed to be utilitzed :D. Myself? I've written an ugly bash script that basically downloads and moves all the modules into place, and talks to mysql to enable them. I would never advise anybody else to use this method, or at least not use my script ;D In a recent Lullabot podcast (probably the most well-known, and definitely most helpful Drupal-based business I know of), they referred to a database-centric way of automating installs that sounded like it could also be just a db script. They promised a blog post, which I am eagerly anticipating. Anyway, your main point about Drupal setup being cumbersome, is true. Most people whose work is all Drupal have ways to deal with this, but if Drupal is only a small part of your computing life, it's not obvious what the best practice is.
mattdennewitz 17y ago
i have never, ever, in my short life, worked with worse code than anything done with drupal. some of what i've seen is downright tragic -- completely illegible, inconsistent, goldbergian in design, and (strong words) just plain dumb. and thats being generous.