Forum OpenACS Q&A: Should CMS be moved to obsolete packages?

1: Should CMS be moved to obsolete packages?

Posted by Alfred Werner on 12/12/03 11:40 PM

I tried installing CMS - it won't install because of a dependency on acs-workflow - which has already been moved to contrib/obsolete-packages. Should we move CMS there too?

2: Re: Should CMS be moved to obsolete packages? (response to 1)

Posted by Don Baccus on 12/12/03 11:54 PM

We need to steal bits of CMS into the CR code base because it is of general use. This is a bit of a toughy - contrib/photobook requires those pieces.

3: Re: Should CMS be moved to obsolete packages? (response to 2)

Posted by tammy m on 12/13/03 12:00 AM

Yeah and the CMS docs actually do a lot of explaining how to use CR. And I'm using some CMS (that should probably be moved to CR) for a custom package. And does BCMS use anything from the CMS?

4: Re: Should CMS be moved to obsolete packages? (response to 3)

Posted by Jeff Davis on 12/13/03 12:02 AM

We could rip out workflow and remove the dependency.

the useful things about CMS (besides the tcl api for content creation) are the content type and cr browsing. which have been quite useful in identifying how packages are misusing the CR.

5: Re: Should CMS be moved to obsolete packages? (response to 1)

Posted by Alfred Werner on 12/13/03 12:49 AM

I had the impression that CMS was on the way out and BCMS was on the way in - but was trying to do a side-by-side comparison when I hit that problem.

I can say that BCMS does not require CMS, and that the bcms-ui-base and bcms-ui-wizard do allow arbitrary access to the CR areas.

Ripping out workflow - it does try to do some workflow initialization during install (I discovered when I tried to fake out CMS by switching the .info file to look for lars' version - it bombed on some call or other).

I guess for now I'll do the symlink trick so I can install it, but as it is currently configured it should be treated as a "show-stopper" for 5.0 IMHO. We need to either remove workflow calls from CMS or restore acs-workflow from purgatory - bad idea to have a non-functional package.

There is an issue with BCMS-ui-* right now - Jun upgraded bcms (the core api package) which broke the ui* packages - someone on IRC today mentioned they had upgraded the ui* to work with tne new bcms but didn't want to commit without checking...

6: Re: Should CMS be moved to obsolete packages? (response to 1)

Posted by Jun Yamog on 12/13/03 05:22 AM

Hi,

Would like to just clarify things: bcms is not meant to replace aD CMS. Its just something I use and contributed to CVS. The cms package is big, and one of the aspects of auto form generation is not something I am working on. I think Lars is working on that. There is also content type creation via UI. And workflow.

There is a group of people trying to figure out what to do with the CMS future of OpenACS. I think that is where any decisions will be made. Although I do agree that having a package that requires an obseleted package is a bit hard.