Comments on: Plumbing Upgrade: We’re Using Bricolage For Content Management

By: name

name — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 18:37:15 +0000

Perfect work,

By: name

name — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 14:59:53 +0000

really great sites, thank you,

By: name

name — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:49:47 +0000

Only,

By: David B

David B — Wed, 06 May 2009 00:07:03 +0000

We’ve been seeking a CMS with static output too. I originally dismissed Bricolage because of Perl in a world of MVC and Java Content Repositories, but am going to review it now.

bw
D

By: Alex Loddengaard

Alex Loddengaard — Wed, 07 May 2008 17:08:23 +0000

Hi Max, we didn’t consider Krang at all. I hadn’t heard about it until I read your comment. At first glance, Krang’s admin panel looks very, very similar to the Bricolage admin panel. Moreover, it looks like Krang is meant for managing news websites, which is again similar to Bricolage. I think that’s about all I can say about Krang at this point; it definitely looks like a nice content management solution!

By: Max Clark

Max Clark — Wed, 07 May 2008 02:15:01 +0000

It’s great to see Bricolage being used more and more for sites with dynamic overlay. I’m curious if you looked at Krang during the evaluation process and what your thoughts were.

By: Alex Loddengaard

Alex Loddengaard — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:38:04 +0000

Hi Sameer, we didn’t consider Liferay, and at this point it’s probably too late. Thanks for the recommendation, though! For everyone else, here’s the link:

http://www.liferay.com/web/guest/home

By: Sameer

Sameer — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 16:35:02 +0000

Haven’t you considered Liferay?

It provides everything you need.

By: Alex Loddengaard

Alex Loddengaard — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 07:26:48 +0000

Thanks for the corrections, Jon. It appears as though the research we did regarding Plone may have been incorrect. I appreciate your corrections here, and I’ll revise the post to reflect your input.

Thanks again!

By: Jon Stahl

Jon Stahl — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 06:33:17 +0000

Alex-

I’m sure you’ll be very happy with Bricolage; it’s a great system.

I think you’ve gotten a couple of facts wrong about Plone though:

1) It has great performance, and scales very well to multiple webservers via “Zope Enterprise Objects.” It’s true that an “out of the box” installation of Plone can be a bit slow, but so are all CMSes that serve content dynamically, and that is why virtually everyone uses caching. It takes about ten minutes of tuning with the CacheFu product to boost its performance 5-10x, and some *very* big websites like Novell.com find Plone fast enough for them!

2) Plone does indeed have static deployment options, but, unfortunately, not out-of-the-box. You can use the add-on products CMFDeployment and/or Entransit to accomplish both static deployment as well as deployment to a simple PHP/.NET/etc front-end. Bricolage is definitely stronger here, though, since static deployment is its only use-case.

3) I’m not sure what “URL Control” means, but you can indeed set the “short-name” of every object in your Plone site and you can control the full URL of every page by choosing where to place it in your site hierarchy.