Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Joomla's Project Director Talks 1.1 96

daria42 writes "It's been a hectic six months for the Joomla open-source CMS since its split from the Mambo project, but according to this interview with project director Andrew Eddie there are even faster times ahead. Next week Joomla will make its formal debut at LinuxWorld Expo in Boston, with the milestone Joomla 1.1 release due towards the end of April. As Mambo and Joomla continue to diverge, Eddie says, users and developers will be forced to declare their colours and pick one or the other for production sites."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Joomla's Project Director Talks 1.1

Comments Filter:
  • by OlivierB ( 709839 ) on Tuesday March 28, 2006 @10:59AM (#15010581)
    Ah yes that's right, Salshdotters need to always use Wikipedia as reference guide http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joomla [wikipedia.org]
  • YACMS (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 28, 2006 @11:08AM (#15010643)

    yet another CMS, add it to the list [cmsmatrix.org] only 548 to choose from, so dont let anyone tell you OSS doesnt give you a choice

    • by mfh ( 56 )
      Yes, even I, at one time, coded my own CMS [sf.net]. Anyone can do it! Yet I would like to see cleaner code from all CMS projects, rather than more features. Benefits, not features, are the true test of a CMS. I put my CMS on hiatus to explore better ways of offering beneifts, because feature creep was killing my spare time!

      I've looked at Joomla and Mambo, yet I couldn't really tell the difference, until you posted that link!

      Check it out... Mambo requires root access and shell access. The benefit of not requiring ei
    • Moreover, this is a fork of yet another cms: FOYACMS. I like the ring of that.. FOYACMS. Maybe this should be the new name!

      Having said that, I think people interested in a CMS for personal or small business use should look into Joomla. It is very easy to administer [joomla.org] and install, provides a lot of flexibility in layout and content and has a lot of community support.
    • Re:YACMS (Score:3, Informative)

      by hey! ( 33014 )
      Well, there's mindshare I guess. A lot of people use Mambo and contribute products and themes for it. That's huge for most potential users.

      After experimenting with it, I'd say it's biggest drawback is a lack of a decent security model. Maintaining a seperate user database is bad enough, but the security model is primitive beyond belief. It doesn't have ACLs, or even anything approaching the old Unix groups. This means its not only difficult to manage Mambo in the context of other network services you
    • I'm sure I'm not the first to ask, but why the hell do we need 548 different CMSs? At what point should developers stop thinking "How about I write yet another sub-standard CMS all by myself" and start thinking "well this one here does 80% of what I want, how about I contribute to it and write the final 20% myself, and improve it overall"?

      I daresay we are well past that point, wherever it is. Time for some quality over quantity people.
    • I dunno. Most "forks" of this kind seem to have a "winner" and a "loser." The winner continues, and the loser, if not dead, lies mortally wounded.

      Example I can think of would be XFree86 (the loser) and X.org (the winner).

  • Flurbal (Score:5, Funny)

    by courtarro ( 786894 ) on Tuesday March 28, 2006 @11:14AM (#15010685) Homepage
    When Smilnar director James Smith presented at the annual HARVL conference, he introduced that the Smilnar project would be joining the Yarbel group to create a new product code-named "Woolpun". Critics of the merger cite problems with Smilnar's compatibility problems with other Romolad systems, but Smith had some choice words for them: "Stewfoo"
    • Re:Flurbal (Score:4, Funny)

      by Cheerio Boy ( 82178 ) on Tuesday March 28, 2006 @11:40AM (#15010870) Homepage Journal
      Dead Monkeys are to split up again, according to their manager, Lefty Goldblatt. They've been in the business now ten years, nine as other groups. Originally the Dead Salmon, they became for a while, Trout. Then Fried Trout, then Poached Trout In A White Wine Sauce, and finally, Herring. Splitting up for nearly a month, the re-formed as Red Herring, which became Dead Herring for a while, and then Dead Loss, which reflected the current state of the group. Splitting up again to get their heads together, they reformed a fortnight later as Heads Together, a tight little name which lasted them through a difficult period when their drummer was suspected of suffering from death. It turned out to be only a rumor and they became Dead Together, then Dead Gear, which lead to Dead Donkeys, Lead Donkeys, and the inevitable split up. After nearly ten days, they reformed again as Sole Manier, then Dead Sole, Rock Cod, Turbot, Haddock, White Baith, the Places, Fish, Bream, Mackerel, Salmon, Poached Salmon, Poached Salmon In A White Wine Sauce, Salmon-monia, and Helen Shapiro. This last name, their favorite, had to be dropped following an injunction and they split up again. When they reformed after a recordbreaking two days, they ditched the fishy references and became Dead Monkeys, a name which they stuck with for the rest of their careers. Now, a fortnight later, they've finally split up.
    • You Slashdot granfaloons just worships the wampeter of technology. It's all foma.
    • Did you just step out of an IKEA store?

  • What? (Score:2, Offtopic)

    by wheany ( 460585 )
    You can't just make up words and acronyms and post it on the front page.
    • Both Joomla and Mambo are Swahili words, mambo being a greeting that roughly translates to an informal "how are you" and jumla means "together".

      Anyhow, that makes jumla or joomla a good name for a CMS; "together" certainly makes more sense than "hey what's up?". I'm not sure why it's anglicised with two OOs, since in Swahili that makes a long "oh" sound, but maybe there already is a project spelled jumla... which would just go to show how hard it is to find a name for a project these day
  • This is right next to where I work and we use joomla on the company portal. Anyone have more info on when this will be presented? I cant find any information on the convention website:
    http://www.linuxworldexpo.com/live/12/events/12BOS 06A/SN919567 [linuxworldexpo.com]

    and the link is slashdotted...
    Apparently exhibits and keynotes are free.

    http://www.linuxworldexpo.com/live/12/register///C C60804 [linuxworldexpo.com]
    • Apparently exhibits and keynotes are free.

      not only free, but open source under the GPL

    • We have a booth in the .Org Pavilion, so you will find me, Andy Miller, and Louis Landry there. Also, interesting to you might be that we are presenting the new API to the BostonPHP group (www.bostonphp.org) on Monday night.

      The expo is not free IIRC, although we will have some expo passes for the BostonPHP presentation.

      If you are in the Boston area, feel free to come by and say hello. We're friendly to other CMS projects as well, as (for example) we had our lead (Andrew) wearing a Drupal tshirt in the L

  • by n00tz ( 926304 ) on Tuesday March 28, 2006 @11:25AM (#15010763) Homepage
    You'll be able to test it out at OpenSourceCMS.com [opensourcecms.com]
  • User friendly? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rueger ( 210566 ) on Tuesday March 28, 2006 @11:38AM (#15010855) Homepage
    All well and good, but the real step needed for OSS CMS is to create one that an average user can administer. By "average" I mean anyone who isn't a hard core code geek. The kind of person who is comfortable installing these systems to their server, but who is more interested in tweaking the look and adding content than spending hours figuring out the arcane thinking of the people who wrote the code.

    I've tried Joomla, as well as few other top rated CMS, and found all of them pretty much imcomprehensible. I'm sure that there is some underlying logic to the Administration of each of these systems, but I have failed to find it. Terminology, functionality, it all cries out for testing by real users.

    Blog software like Wordpress [wordpress.org] has managed to make Administration nice, understandable, and constantly improving, so why can't CMS like Joomla do the same?

    And of course, they really do need some real documentation, not half baked wikis and forums.
    • Re:User friendly? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by ukpyr ( 53793 )
      Actual CMS software has a horridly large scope to deal with. Blog software is, I don't know, 10% as complex? (To pick a number out of the air)
    • Well, the issue with CMSes that I've tried is that they give you pretty much a) an empty canvas and b) a few half-assed templates. Everybody seems to want to do their own thing with it, which never ever seems to fit into any template. Basicly, you have all the wierdness of web design combined with all the wierdness of how people want things to hang together. My impression of blogs is that people aren't too concerned if the templates look decent, if you can just replace the look. Well, people want much more
      • Hint: For most usage in enviroments where a CMS is helpfull, the "empty canvas" is the only reasonable choice. Most problems with CMS systems are when people don't really need them and try to force them onto their process.
        • Exactly! I'm speaking from personal experience. I thought I'd design a "front door" to my website using Joomla where my blog is the "family room" and my forum the "living room" (or whatever analogy works).

          Let me just say this: Joomla or any CMS requires loads of content to make it worth your while. If you have a blog, and it's not overflowing with info and links, there is probably no reason for a CMS. If you aren't trying to create a community around your products, services or expertise, a CMS isn't for
    • One main problem is that open source projects that are meant for the average person need an average person as a mian contributor to UI and functionality.

      That said CMS do a lot so there will always be a lot of stuff int he admin interface. If you want something easy with great documentation, then pay for it. This way the company you are paying can afford to make it easier to use.

      Or just pay one of the developers of the CMS to set it all up for you. I am sure they would love to get some cash as a result of
    • Are you kidding me? Joomla and its counterpart have to be the easiest to use CMS software ever designed!

      Yes it can look a little daunting, but as another poster has pointed out... CMSes are infinitely more complex than a blog. What are you thinking? A CMS with an interface as simple as Wordpress would be absolutely uselss as a CMS. Basically... it'd be a blog :).

      Quit yer whining. Seriously. If you can't admin a CMS then you have no right in even bothering to try. And complaining about the complexity
      • After just evaluating Joomla alongside e107 I found Joomla took at least twice as long for every part of set up. This is a new project and they should smooth things out, but this is an important part of any CMS product and Joomla is way behind in this. The easy browser install is likely not to work for many users. Building up the basic database user and tables is confusing when it should be foolproof and automatic. Subtle problems with the configuration cause bizarre errors instead of helpful warnings.
    • I don't buy that excuse at all. I purchased a domain that came with the Cpanel and Fantastico script, and installing Joomla was a piece of cake that involved nothing more than supplying a name and password and choosing the root directory. The folks that make Fantastico are geniuses. Installing Joomla was no harder than opening a Gmail mail account, and using Joomla since then is as easy as clicking on big colorful buttons.

    • Wordpress has about 2 percent of the functionality of most CMS. So how would you propose to dumb down administration by 98 percent?
    • All well and good, but the real step needed for OSS CMS is to create one that an average user can administer.

      I think this is only true for the "average" non-professional fan site or personal blog / project.

      When thinking of an "enterprise grade" CMS that a commercial site might use, where there are complex content management problems that involve complicated taxonomy and multi users and editors, it can be expected that the administration is going to be complex as well. This is not to say that the admins o

  • by joeygb ( 530333 ) on Tuesday March 28, 2006 @11:38AM (#15010857)
    I've been using Joomla for a while now and it is definitely the way to go in the Mambo vs. Joomla decision. Joomla is really great for personal sites because of the vast number of themes/modules/plugins/etc. out there. The only problem is that a lot of these 3rd party components are far from being a stable, polished final product. I think that if Joomla wants to be used more in the business world then it probably has a lot of work to do, but for less "mission critical" uses Joomla is the way to go. I think that Joomla could learn a lot from another big open source CMS, Drupal, when it comes to building a CMS for business uses.

    As an aside, is it required that all CMSs have ridiculous names?
  • Oh no, Joomla, what a weird name! ... Except that Gimp or Apache make me think of a bondage loving dude in Pulp Fiction and an Indian ('Indian' speaking of bad naming)
    • 'Native $country' is typically a more logically correct (not to mention politically correct) naming.

      ...or you could always call them savages ;-)
    • I know this is a familiar dig (ha ha look at those stooopid open source developers, they don't have the brains to name their project novell, or exxon or soething) but the reality is that all the english words are already owned by corporations. You can't name your product anything sensible because all the words are owned and you will get sued.

      Should the open source developers risk getting sued for you? Just to give you a name you are more likely to approve of?

      There is a solution though. You and people who th
      • I know this is a familiar dig (ha ha look at those stooopid open source developers, they don't have the brains to name their project novell, or exxon or soething) but the reality is that all the english words are already owned by corporations. You can't name your product anything sensible because all the words are owned and you will get sued.

        Nice analogy in your attempt to say that all the major corporations own these words but Exxon isn't a word. Not to mention the fact that your analogy tends to bre

        • "Nice analogy in your attempt to say that all the major corporations own these words but Exxon isn't a word."

          Looks like it went right over your head there. Exxon isn't a word, neither is joomla, novell, ebay, nissan or whatever. My point is that you guys are always bitching about open source names without realzing that most company and product names are not words either. Why? Because virtually all words are owned by somebody or another. That's why there is the nissan maxima and the BMW X5.

          "Not to mention th
  • Any /.ers know of any useful comparisons between the various CMS systems out there? I don't just want a list of features but an actual comparison with ease-of-use, etc. I need to use something for my personal site.
  • The article didn't say anything about new features, and was just a fluff piece. The last paragraph had a one sentence blurp about "more object-oriented features", but that was it.
  • by penguin-collective ( 932038 ) on Tuesday March 28, 2006 @01:27PM (#15011649)
    Does anybody have a recommendation for a CMS similar to Joomla or Drupal that doesn't require a separate database server? Something that gets by with either the file system or SQLite? WYSIWYG content creation is a must in this application, so Wikis aren't an option.
  • Yes, the current Joomla is based largely on Mambo, that's because they recently split. But from what I understand, Joomla 1.1 (I'm hearing it will actually be called 1.5) will have a new underlying structure that makes everything more uniform and easier to use, as well as making less problems for third parties and their components/modules. What I also like about Joomla over Mambo is that Mambo releases patches maybe once every four months and just for a security issue. Joomla releases patches to fix minor
  • Joomla is awesome and I hope it will continue to grow;. However I always advise my clients to use Mambo (4.5.1 even) simply because Mambo and Joomla (> 4.5.1) have compatibility problems with Safari and most of my clients are Safari users.

    The problem is that buttons like Save / Cancel / etc. do not work when editing an article either in the front-end or the back end. Sometimes even in FireFox they fail. And no, IE is not an option. All these buttons work fine in any browser in Mambo versions right up

I've finally learned what "upward compatible" means. It means we get to keep all our old mistakes. -- Dennie van Tassel