WineHQ on CMS/Framework

[Aleksey Bragin]

We had same question in the ReactOS web site. We have our own in-house 
developed CMS called RosCMS now, however there is a strong desire to 
change it to something maintained by 3rd party, so Drupal and Typo3 were 
considered.

Two prototype websites were made, one using Drupal7 and another one 
(more recent and more complete) using Typo3. What's important is that we 
have a substantial set of interconnected services too:
* JIRA (formerly Bugzilla, integrated authentication with the main website)
* Mailing lists (no need for integration)
* FishEye as a source code browser (integrated)
* GIT mirror with source code browser (no need for integration)
* Doxygen source code browser (no need for integration)
* MediaWiki (fully integrated, single sign-on)
* Forums (fully integrated, single sign-on)
* Compatibility database (integrated with RosCMS, single sign-on, 
however it's ported neither to D7 nor T3)
* Test manager (http://www.reactos.org/testman )
* Paste service (fully integrated to prevent spam, single sign-on)
* Trunk builds download manager (http://www.reactos.org/getbuilds/ )

If any help is needed, let me know, would be glad to share.

Best regards,
Aleksey Bragin.

On 22.09.2012 7:32, Kyle Auble wrote:
> After working on the wiki for a while, I finally wanted to ask about
> possibly moving WineHQ to a CMS or web framework.
>
> First off, while there are a couple of mentions on the wiki and mailing
> lists, is there still much interest in doing this? If there is, I think
> the second question is which kind of system do we want to use?
>
> While http://wiki.winehq.org/WinehqDesign mentions Drupal, which has a
> lot of plugins and features for easy editing, I've read that a CMS can
> become a hassle if your website needs to do more complex things than
> serving regular chunks of content. WineHQ provides a bug-tracker, a
> forum, a wiki, mailing lists, source-code browsers, and other tools
> besides static content, with lots of interconnections between them. If
> we did go with a web framework, we could still probably run a CMS on top
> of it for the AppDB and static pages.
>