Jeroen Coumans jeroen at
Fri Nov 21 01:25:40 PST 2003

Hi Anderson Lizardo. You said the following on 11/21/03 00:52:
> Jeroen Coumans wrote:
>>Also there are no features which a CMS would bring us that we
>>require, except for the poll system. But this feels much more "from
>>scratch", doesn't it :-)
> Yes, but only if we are not reinventing the wheel ;-). We are not doing 
> it yet, but soon, when we need more features, a CMS implementation will 
> become necessary and even more productive.
> The main reason that stops me from starting the migration right now is 
> the possible problems we could find related to mirroring. A PHP site is 
> easy to mirror, AFAIK. Just enable PHP on all mirrors. But what about 
> Perl-based CMS (like Slashcode)? It may require additional modules that 
> some mirrors may not have or even may not be interested on installing 
> them. We need to discuss this before starting any tests. If we conclude 
> that a CMS implementation is possible with our current resources 
> (including mirrors), we then may start the migration plans.

Hm I didn't consider this because I thought a CMS would allow us to keep 
this seperated, eg. the CMS on the LFS server (belgarath) ;publishes 
some pages which the mirrors resync. Similar to what we have now, except 
it wouldn't be our code. As soon as we need dynamically generated pages 
(because of a comment system like /.) we'd need a CMS that advanced. But 
currently I don't see the need for this, and I don't anticipate it will 
be necessary in the next year (or two...).

> Backing to the present... :o)
> If I understood it right, the only modification needed is to output only 
> the latest news item and add URLs pointing to the next 5 ones. If so, 
> yes, I think it's possible and easy to implement.

Yep, that would be great :)

Jeroen Coumans (jeroen at
FAQ and Website Maintainer

More information about the website mailing list