Telligent's Community Server [closed]

Telligent's Community Server [closed] - community-server

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
The company I work for is wanting to add blog functionality to our website and they were looking to spend an awful amount of money to have some crap being built on top of a CMS they purchased (sitecore). I pointed them to Telligent's Community Server and we had a sales like meeting today to get the Marketing folks on board.
My question is if anyone has had issues working with Community Server, skinning it and extending it?
I wanted to explain a bit why I am thinking Community Server, the company is wanting multiple blogs with multiple authors. I want to be out of the admin part of this as much as possible and didn't think there were too many engines that having multiple blogs didn't mean db work. I also like the other functionality that Community Server provides and think the company will find it useful, particularly the media section as right now we have some really shotty way of dealing with whitepapers and stuff.
edit: We are actually using the Sitecore blog module for a single blog on our intranet (which is actually what the CMS is serving). Some reasoning for why I don't like it for our public site are they are on different servers, it doesn't support multiple authors, there is no built in syndication, it is a little flimsy feeling to me from looking at the source and I personally think the other features of Community Server make its price tag worth it.
another edit: Need to stick to .net software that run on sql server in my company's case, but I don't mind seeing recommendations for others. ExpressionEngine looks promising, will try it out on my personal box.

I've done quite a few projects using Community Server. If you're okay with the out-of-the-box functionality, or you don't mind sticking to the version you start with, I think you'll be very happy.
The times I've run into headaches using CS is when the client wants functionality CS does not provide, but also insists on keeping the ability to upgrade to the latest version whenever Telligent releases an update. You can mostly support that by making all of your changes either in a separate project or by only modifying aspx/ascx files (no codebehinds). Some kind of merge is going to be required though no matter how well you plan it out.

Community Server itself has been very solid for me, but if all you need is a blogging engine then it may be overkill. Skinning it, for example, is quite a bit of work (despite their quite powerful Chameleon theme engine).
I'd probably look closer at one of the dedicated blog engines out there, like BlogEngine.NET, dasBlog or SubText, if that's all you need. Go with Community Server if you think you'll want more "community-focused" features like forums etc.

You can also take a look at Telligent Graffiti CMS.
http://graffiticms.com/
It supports multiple blogs and authors.
Update: It's now open source and available at http://graffiticms.codeplex.com/

Community Server 2008.5 lets you add several members that can post articles. Also with
Community Server 2008.5 you now have wiki's along with forums and the blogs. This probably has one of the better web based admin control panel's I seen in a while. This let's you easily change several things including the site's theme (or skin). To me it is one of the most scalable applications I have seen in a while. We are using it for our site http://knowledgemgmtsolutions.com.

Skinning is pretty straightforward, and the sidebar widgets aren't very difficult to create (if you don't mind building controls in code). The widgets also allow options for the users to customize them in the control panel very easily. I doubt you'll find a strong community of widget builders for Community Server however. Nothing compared to the dev community for blogs like wordpress.
I recommend starting templates from scratch and adding in CS controls as needed, to get the markup you prefer for styling and to use only what you need.
Setting up different roles for users to post to different blogs is also very easy and requires no coding. You can have blog groups, and allow only certain users to post to certain blogs.

Sitecore's Forum module is powered by Community Server and integrated with Sitecore CMS.

Expression Engine with the Multi-Site Manager works great for that kind of situation.

Have you had a look at the Shared Source blog module for Sitecore?

Related

DotNetNuke, Umbraco or Orchard [closed]

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 9 years ago.
First off please have patience for this long winded post. I wanted to get all the pertinent information (as I see it) out to you.
I have a decision to make and would like your input. I have recently taken on the task of taking over my daughter's skating club's website. They have a custom site written in asp pages and don't have anyone to support it. I want to move their site to a CMS system so it doesn't take a developer to maintain or make changes to it. We also want to add some custom pieces to it like a registration form for the club and some other custom pieces around marking down scores and viewing stats and such.
I am a .Net developer and have been developing in SharePoint for some time, but don't feel that SharePoint is a very good fit for them. Our current web host is GoDaddy. I don't yet have the details of the contract with them yet so can't comment on the service we have with them.
I have been looking at three CMS's at the moment. DotNetNuke, Umbraco, and Orchard. All are good and all have pros and cons as far as I can see. I am currently leaning towards DotNetNuke for the following reasons:
Umbraco appears to be a "create from scratch" system with no templates to apply (I apologize if this is incorrect, but it is based on the information I received). I am not a guy to develop the visual aspects of a site, so would rely heavily on templates and such.
Orchard sounds like it might be a good fit, however I have never developed in MVC before. Most of my .NET has been straight ASPX. I am not opposed to learning MVC and have had it on my list for a while, but I don't know if I have the time to learn and port over the current site.
Orchard also appears to be a bit heavy for a normal user (explaining content types and such). I want something others can take up when I pass on the responsibility.
So I am wondering what you all think. Even with learning MVC would Orchard be the best platform for us based on the information I have provided? Should I stay with DotNetNuke as my choice? I would like to mention that I did consider Sitefinity and would have had it at the top of my list, except we are a non-profit and don't necassarily have the budget for a paid CMS.
Thanks again and I look forward to your thoughts.

Well, the ultimate choice will vary on your business need. They all do the same thing, but how they achieve the goal is quite different.
Umbraco - It utilizes the Model, View, Controller (MVC) methodology. This obviously presents an assortment of benefits. However, the methodology to build a product can be quite extensive and even the layout to modify data can be quite cumbersome.
DotNetNuke - Uses a more familiar technology, Web-Forms. This has an assortment of benefits that go a long with it. Including a market, documentation, permission, and ease.
I've never used Orchard so I can't comment- but I can comment on the other two. To show you how I came to my conclusion to use which Content Management System hopefully it will point you in the best direction.
My project that I worked on required a lot of non-technical people to utilize our new product. It has a lot of functionality and features that were required; the biggest however was ensuring the following:
Ease
Intuitive
Control
Speed
Those were our four primary categories. I'll attempt to outline what each area means-
One of the largest pitfall of a Content Management System is that they tend to do more then you require. So the question becomes which product will bend while maintaining my core goals be. For that reason our company chose DotNetNuke because by nature DotNetNuke isn't a Content Management System it is a very powerful Framework.
What this particular product does is focus on a lot of key aspects so a developer doesn't have to waste a lot of time in maintaining but rather in developing.
Ease - A non-technical user is able to view a page; then edit the content in place on that page. Which allows you to incorporate a What you see, is what you get mentality. For the non-developer they get the all familiar Email or Word Editor.
Intuitive - In DotNetNuke 7 they've modified the menu structure for editing. You can actually disable other users to make it actually show less, do less, and still maintain the highest level of control. The user won't get lost in editing the page.
Control - Now this is what is nice, you can regulate each and every control for your user. So you can allow certain content to be regulated and other data not to be.
Speed - It has a market, so you can implement other developer modules. But it also includes a lot of documentation- it may appear cumbersome at first but is quite easy to pick up. Which makes the initial start time relatively painless.
But what do all of those mean to you?
Simple, it means you can develop a beautiful elegant page quite quickly. But since you can restrict several tiers of access you can ensure the page content can be edited by someone other then you- But it won't jeopardize any of your development / content. As you control whom and what is modified.
If your familiar with Microsoft .Net then it will be quite easy to learn; I'm sure other products can accomplish those same goals. But DotNetNuke did it easier which met our goals. It allowed us to not worry about excessive issues or support to enter our company; as the user understood it in such a way that issues don't arise.
That is why we chose DotNetNuke it will boil down to your preference. My experience with the product, community, and marketplace have made me love this product and not chose another. As I can leverage the Core API when needed; so Development, Maintenance, Administration became a breeze for whatever my imagination may produce. But should a developer ever not be present the site and it's quality will not hinder when I leave.

There is a selection of starter kits available in the package repository on the community website and also a few of them can be applied directly during installation of Umbraco. Also in the package repository you will find a wide selection of other packages which you can use on your site to enhance and add additional functionality.
It is true that Umbraco does not come pre-installed with "themes" as such like some other CMS's but this is the beauty of Umbraco, you have a clean slate to work from if you choose. It enforces no requirements on your markup or styling so there is absolutely nothing to stop you using a free or purchased template from any one of the template libraries online such as Creative Market, Template Monster etc etc.
Umbraco has an incredibly friendly, helpful and active community on both the forums and Twitter.

I work with all three and would tell you to use DotNetNuke over the other 2. The primary reason is that if you are developer, Orchard and Umbraco are fine... but you may or may not be the final or future content manager in the future of the club and want to be able to hand the site off to someone. DotNetNuke has the larger community and would be easier for the future admins to learn as well as get support for.
DNN will give you the development options you want, but give the content editors the easier system to work work... and keep you from having to support the site if you ever move on.

don't forget that Sitefinity does have a free community edition: http://www.sitefinity.com/try-now/free-asp-net-cms
it does have limitations, but for simple sites like this it might be just what you need, plus if they ever get a budget someday they could upgrade to the Small Business Edition by just buying a license and get more features and less limitations on the content and page limits.
worth a look.
otherwise, in my opinion your choice depends on who is going to be maintaining the site. If that is you and you'll always be in charge, pick whatever platform works best for you as a developer.
If on the other hand you have to make it drop-dead easy, pick the platform that is best for end users, that based on your knowledge of the user, would require the least amount of training (Sitefinity CE has my vote on that one!)
I hope this is helpful!

I would highly recommend going with DotNetNuke for the sheer reason that the community and available modules for the platform far surpasses any of the other options.
If you want to do MVC style development, you can with DNN using the WebAPI approach for services, but if you don't want to, you can skip that altogether.
The amount of Free and Paid extensions for DNN grows on a daily basis, available in the Store or Forge. You can also search both of these locations right from within the product itself.

GitHub vs Google Code for a hobby project [closed]

I prefer Google Code since it's just easier for my small personal projects. At the end of the day, for free projects, it's hard to steal time from family, friends or other commitments and the key to making small free projects a success is being realistic with your time. (Elsewise, you get the "80% done" problem.)
Google Code now has GIT support.
Biggest advantage of Google Code is that you don't need a website.
- The frontpage of the project is enough.
- You can add simple binary downloads in the Downloads section.
- In comparison, GITHUB's interface is REALLY confusing to non-programmers. Your frontpage is full of technobabble and so unless it's a coder's tool, you'll need a separate website.
- Marketing's really good- You get a good rank on Google and often you'll be picked up and sometimes reviewed by other download sites. There's no sense donating your time if no one can find your project.
If it is entirely a coder's tool (not just a handy IT tool), then perhaps GITHUB is better.

You say "I believe my context is different", but don't give any reasons why it is. As such, I can't offer you any specific suggestions other than the generic pros and cons, which are outlined in various documents and tutorials online.
My suggestion: pick a program first (git, Mercurial, or SVN) and use it. Find a hosting site that supports the software (at the time of this answer, GitHub for git, BitBucket or Google Code for Mercurial, Google Code for SVN) and use it. If you run into problems, switch to another one.
I've used all three, and typically the problem isn't the hosting, but the fact that you need to learn the program itself. All of the hosting providers listed here will suit you fine until you have a specific reason why it doesn't.

I would go with Github. The single reason for this is, that Google code shows your email and your full name (name only if you have google+ i think). And you cannot disable this at the moment.

Let's split the problem into two parts: for developers and for users.
In fact, if just terminal users are considered, both google code and gitbud has friendly interfaces, and as we all know, google is more well-known towards those who do not program.
But when we turn to programmers, git is more fashion and more comfortable(question?).
So, personally I will choose google code if I am planning an terminal user oriented product and github of course if I want to involve lots of potential collaborators of I was developing an complete programmers' product, like a API something.

What are the differences between a wiki and a CMS [closed]

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
What are the differences between a wiki and a CMS? Is there any?

CMS:
A CMS focuses on content which is then published through standardized templates -- think of an online newspaper as driven by a huge CMS system.
It's about standardized publishing information.
CMS'es usually have a limited group of editors.
Useful for relatively static content, maintained by non-tech people.
Much emphasis on style/presentation: very slick templates so it looks professional.
Wiki:
On the other hand, a wiki focuses on pages where each page represents a topic.
It's much more about collaboratively improving each topic (adding hyperlinks to other topics and websites counts as improving the topic).
Wikis are generally much more open to "the public" (or everybody in the company, vs. just the "internal communication" department).
Wikis are meant to be living, dynamic things, maintained by everybody.
Much emphasis on content: less slick templates but easier to find and update information.

The difference is in the letter "M". A content management system manages content. A CMS often has built-in workflow and other features to make it easier to manage a collection of assets. For example, to move articles from staging to production, to facilitate proofreading, etc.
A wiki is more like a public bulletin board. Anyone can add any content at any time and in any way they choose.
Think of it perhaps as the difference between an IDE and a text editor. Both can be used for many similar tasks but one is a bit more structured than the other.
Of course, the lines can blurr in that some Wikis have tools for managing the content and some CMS's are nothing more than "type here and press the submit button".

Typically a Wiki is community editable, visitors to the site can edit it, take Wikipedia for example. A CMS is more designed typially, for a set of site administrators to manage and display content.

A Wiki is a type of CMS, CMS come in many flavors, but all manage some content somehow. In a wiki's case the content is user-editable and creatable information or articles.

In some cases, a wiki is built on a CMS. A wiki is an application, that people use. A CMS is just a kind of database. CMS's often have front-end administrator applications. However, the point of a CMS is to manage content for some purpose-built front-end application.
CMS is to Wiki as Database is to Financial Application.

In the conceptual world a Wiki is for collectible content, anybody can create, delete, modify any content. Is oriented on knowledge.
A CMS manages content, is oriented on format, form, maintenability.
Some wikis are constructed with an CMS

A CMS is a Content Management System. The idea behind the development of CMS evolved when the need for a Management System amplified. A CMS works as a cornerstone for web development by the help of which a developer can build powerful and feature-rich websites in minimum amount of time and effort. A good and powerful CMS not rectifies the frustrating need of writing repetitive and mundane codes, but also eliminates arduous and heavy tasks involved in building a website or web application.
Wikipedia on the other hand is an information directory. Sites such as Wikipedia can be built on a CMS, for instance The New York Times and TechCrunch is built on WordPress. In regard to information acquisition, Wikipedia is the best place that a user can go for - even better than Google. The number of articles Wikipedia contains is stupendous and highly reliable. The daily number of users depending on Wikipedia for information, itself serves as a testimonial for the service Wiki offers to us users.

How do I choose a CMS/Portal solution for a small website(s)? [closed]

If you want to quickly compare features on CMS's, then take a look at CMS Matrix - has practically every cms known to man on there.
Edit
To be a little more precise, from the site
CMSMatrix is the number one content management system comparison site on the Internet. It allows users to evaluate over 950 content management systems in 135+ different categories.

Go with N2 if you want to get up and running in no time with a couple of nice features packed. Also, it is really targetted against extensibility and clean code.
http://www.n2cms.com

"Open Source cms" has tons of them, and running demos with admin logins

DotNetNuke:
very flexible
lots of community around it
community tends to be fairly technical and can be hard to find useful end-user support
can be difficult to upgrade and to keep current versions available
fairly easy to program basic modules for
100s of available modules (free and pay)
documentation can be difficult to find and sparse in detail
easy to skin so your sites can have a unified look
1000s of pre made skins available.
hopefully this is along the lines of what you are looking for.

I've found that CMS Matrix (refer:iAn) can sometimes be a bit out of date but it is definitely a good starting place. Open Source CMS is a good resource (refer:mrinject). I'd lean towards something you can tinker with - closed source could back you into a corner.
If you're looking into .NET then MojoPortal is another option, as is umbracco etc. Search here on DNN and these others. I've found Drupal to be be more intimidating to approach. Also, it's forums are pretty basic. Joomla tends to want money for add-ins, as does DNN although there are freebies for both. Apparently the freebies fro Joomla can vary in quality - I never looked into it too closely.
I think the pick of the PHP crowd is Drupal - if you can invest the headspace for learning it. Drupal tends to be more developer-friendly than end-user friendly so if you're not a developer it is harder to grasp than something like Joomla. Apparently its codebase is better than Joomla.
Have a browse through the communities - you'll spend some time there so make sure they are to your liking.
If the site is quite simple then perhaps WordPress will suffice as it has a plethora of plugins and there are lots of template available for free or
I've been meandering down this path for a while now. My advice is to set up some test installs and roughly configure them to something that has what you want and then try using and and - important - try to break it. Installing them together on the same server is a good way to test the relative speed differences too.
Test drive them - it's the only way to tell which one works for you.

DotNetNuke out of the box contains a lot of features, content management, link management, documents list modules, forum modules, and items of that nature. There is also a very good third-party module and skin market out there for getting the enhancements needed to really get a full solution implemented.
With a little bit of time DNN can serve as a great foundation for a collection of websites. It also supports a multi-portal system that allows you to host more than one site off of the same code base which is very helpful.
The best part of all is that it is Free!

As you mentioned, there are plenty of options available, most of them have all the basic features. If you are looking for a simple setup, most may even be overkill for what you are trying to achieve. Which CMS you choose, may best depend on your preference for the programming language the CMS is using.
For some websites I maintain, I have used Typo3 (http://www.typo3.com/). The reason for my choice was the flexibility of Typo3, with its many (many!) plugins for all sorts of features, and for the ability to develop plugins yourself.
HTH,
J.

Assuming you're going open source, strong considerations are:
An active and knowledgeable community. <-- You don't want to be the only person able to support this CMS in 10 years time.
regular and simple updating techniques.
Your skill sets.

As a vendor, I find CMS matrix to be daunting. Its basically a list of every CMS under the sun, with a few generic ratings and reviews. Before selecting a CMS, I'd commit to a model first, then I'd investigate the various options that are available.
Open Source...has lots of user generated support, but often requires the assistance of outside developers for software maintenance and add-on installation.
Private installed solutions...can be easier to work with, but lock you in to one vendor for maintenance.
SaaS Model...still locks in to one vendor, but all updates are included and initial costs are minimal.

Family Website CMS [closed]

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 11 years ago.
I am looking for a CMS that would be incredibly user-friendly and would have the following features:
really simple message board (no login required)
family tree
story telling area
photo section
news section
Is there anything out there like this that is really easily configurable? I've already messed around with Mambo and Family Connects, but I didnt like either of those. In the past I've just programmed my own websites, for lack of easily implementable features. However, I've assuming there's something I need out there just like this, that I can't find. Thanks.
I don't want anyone to have to login, for one. The is for a family website, and much of my family really don't know what a website is, let alone how to use one. I want a super simple website with huge buttons and not a whole lot of distractions. Family Connects is a good example of what I want, except the photo album is horrible. I want people to post messages without logging in or signing up, and haven't seen that ability in mambo sites I've looked at.

I can understand your stipulation that your users (family) shouldn't have to sign up - but without a sign-in, your site will be a free-for-all for spammers, hackers and other bored Internet denizens.
That said, my suggestion is to use WordPress for a front end - register your family members yourself, and use a very basic template - or better yet, create one.

I have created a CMS for exactly what you are looking for. My family uses it all the time and the majority of them are not computer savy. The only downside is that it requires a login, but like other people have said, their really isn't a way around that if you want your information to be private.
Anyway, if you are still looking, try http://www.familycms.com/

I've been using http://www.myfamily.com/ and it fits all my needs. It includes:
Pictures (with option to order prints)
Discussion
Family Trees (free from ancestry.com)
Videos
Files
Events

I've setup CMS Made Simple a couple times now. It's all PHP and you can edit it to your heart's content. Give it a try.

CMS made simple seems to die according to this study about content management systems found on MytestBox.com
But if it's just for a family website...
maybe you can try other CMSs which any web hosting company provides (like Joomla or Wordpress).
These can be installed in several clicks (especially Wordpress - you can build a good site in Wordpress and it's very easy to maintain it).
For a family website I thiknk Wordpress is the best and enough (lots of plugins and skins can be found for it on the web.

If you're going for a family website you do have the option of removing the usernames/passwords/accounts by setting it up as an intranet site. Then you can browse it at home or from selective addresses.

I recommend geni.com. It's much better than Myfamily.com

We Keep Coding

iphone swift flutter scala powershell matlab mongodb postgresql perl eclipse