A few weeks ago I highlighted an article by Acquia's VP of Marketing Jeff Whatcott. In it, Jeff came up with a definition of something he calls "social publishing." He described it as a blend of what we currently expect from a web content management system, aspects of online networking such as blogs, wikis and sites like Facebook and YouTube, plus the ability to create web applications using a common framework.

I liked Jeff's terminology then; I like it even better today. For the purposes of this discussion, I include Joomla, Drupal, Plone and other similar software as content management systems and WordPress, Moveable Type and Blogger and their kin as personal publishing, or blogging, platforms. But as open source developers have extended the capabilities of these packages, they are coming closer to each other's niche markets.

Plenty of bloggers are using CMS software to run their blogs; New Tech Heroes is just one of many sites that are primarily blog-driven using Drupal in that way. With the modules and extensions available for WordPress today, and more expected when version 2.5 is introduced, it's more than just a blog platform now. Is it a CMS yet? Does it matter?

Bryan Ruby examined the "social publishing" terminology on his CMSReport blog last Thursday. Noting that we're now dealing with "something more than a CMS," Bryan writes:

What do you call a Web application capable of publishing and managing not only content, but is an application that also manages wikis, social networking, documents, forums, photos, and blogs? Some people will tell you these diverse features are best described under such terms as social software, Web 2.0, social networking, and Enterprise 2.0. While these terms may help create a lot of buzz, I have some difficulty in using these terms to describe the information system model being used by the applications. If you think the definition of a CMS can be a fuzzy or limiting term, wait until you start using the term "social software" in a business setting. Personally, I don't think my boss is in the mood to deal with such vague terms.

The imprecision of terms does make selling this technology difficult to our employers and clients. Not only is "content management" difficult to define for them, the whole idea that there's any "content" to "manage" is baffling to many decision makers. Don't we just want a web page? Haven't we progressed enough if we get that far? Now we're supposed to be "social," too?

It reminds me of the rise of "desktop publishing" twenty years ago. Large print shops hated the term - and the technology - because it implied anyone could do what they'd been doing with their big Linotype machines and composition tables for years. (The fact that not anyone could actually do good layout work became apparent soon enough. I still see brochures laid out using Microsoft Publisher that feature eight or more fonts.) Yet we needed some term back then to describe what PageMaker could do, and desktop publishing did the trick. Interestingly, you rarely hear the term "desktop publishing" anymore, because now everyone - including the big print shops - does layout work on computers now.

So maybe in the long run it won't matter with social publishing, either. For now, though, it seems like we need to have a term that describes this evolving type of software that's driving how individuals, businesses and organizations are communicating in 2008. "Social publishing" works for me. What do you think?

SilverStripe has posted a release candidate for an patch that will fix "several dozen issues," according to the release notice.

Current users of the SilverStripe open source CMS are asked to download and install version 2.2.2rc1 and report any problems during setup, upgrading or operations. Keep in mind that release candidate software is not the final version and may still contain bugs, so caution should be taken before using this version on a live production site.

More information on SilverStripe is available on the project's overview page.

2008 - The Year of the Open Source CMS

Awareness of the benefits of using Open Source CMS software is evident by the number of mentions CMS has received in the past year. Here are some recent reviews or commentaries about CMS or individual software solutions:

• Joomla and Drupal were named two of the "Top Web Gadgets of 2007" by Adam Davidson of National Public Radio.
• Joomla developer Barrie North explains why he thinks 2008 will be the "year of the open source CMS."
• Drupal lead developer Dries Buytaert describes the exciting possibilities for his CMS on his blog.
• The New York Times has embraced open source solutions for its website and other content management, as described on its Open blog written by Jacob Harris.
• CNET's Matt Asay reports on a study showing that Open Source software bugs are fixed faster than those in proprietary software.

Other resources

• OpenSourceCMS.com. Try out dozens of different Open Source CMS products at one site.
• Packt Publishing's 2007 CMS Awards
• O'Reilly Open Source Convention - OSCON 2008. To be held in July 2008 in Portland, Oregon.
• List of content management systems. From Wikipedia.
• CMSMatrix. Compare CMS solutions side-by-side.

Part Two - Popular CMS solutions

Content Management System software is available commercially from several vendors, as well as from many free or open source software (FOSS) communities. The quality of the open source versions, especially the market leaders mentioned in this article, is very good, and using open source has the additional benefit of an collaborative community of programmers working on improvements and bug fixes, often able to respond faster than their commercial rivals. Of course, cost is the advantage many IT managers are interested in when considering open source alternatives, as most of these packages are available free or for a small donation of time or money.

In either case, using a CMS solution, whether commerical or FOSS, saves money in development time and also provides stronger security through the technical support of the software vendor or the collaborative programming community.

Commercial CMS solutions

Inevitably, when discussing commerical software, Microsoft is the 800 pound gorilla in the room, and it's no different when discussing CMS software. Microsoft Office SharePoint Server (MOSS) and Windows SharePoint Services are the software giant's approach to not only content management, but also document management and other collaborative workplace functions. It's a large, impressive solution, and the 2007 version added many of the features its Open Source competition already had: blogs, news feeds via RSS, custom content types, polls and more. For many IT professionals specifying a CMS solution, SharePoint is the choice because of its Microsoft pedigree; the old adage that no one ever lost their job by specifying Microsoft is still true at many businesses. That said, there are benefits and drawbacks to using SharePoint as your CMS solution.

Benefits

• It's Microsoft. You may have heard of them.
• Comprehensive content and document management capabilities.
• Consistent look and feel to end users plus excellent integration with Microsoft Office applications.
• Technical support available directly from the vendor.

Drawbacks

• It's Microsoft. I'm sure you've heard of them.
• Hardware and software requirements may be overkill for a small business looking to simply manage an intranet or an interactive web site/business blog.
• Expensive, especially compared to Open Source alternatives.

Microsoft's primary competitor in the comprehensive CMS solution market is IBM's Websphere product. There are also numerous CMS products targeted at specific types of businesses, such as newspapers or healthcare, but those are beyond the scope of this article.

Free or Open Source software (FOSS) solutions

There have been hundreds of Open Source CMS packages written since 2000. Some continue to be updated by a small, fiercely dedicated group of supporters, while many are no longer supported and should be avoided. Like the commercial marketplace, there are Open Source solutions designed for specific business situations, and again I won't be covering those in this article.

After a consolidation of users over the past few years, a handful of Open Source CMS products have risen to the top. Your choice in selecting one of them will be affected by the technical specifics of your web server, because their database and programming language requirements vary. But all of the products listed below are supported by a strong group of users and programmers. General benefits and drawbacks of choosing an Open Source CMS solution are:

Benefits

• The basic functionality needed for an effective content management solution, without additional overhead that may be unnecessary.
• Good scaleability. Open Source CMS solutions are used by individuals, small businesses, newspapers, magazines and large corporations.
• Support of a community of dedicated volunteer programmers. Often bug fixes are patched within hours of the support request.
• Low cost. Often completely free.
• Large number of low-cost or free add-on modules and templates make it easy to customize your site the way you want it without having to do a lot of programming yourself.

Drawbacks

• It's not Microsoft. The fact that Open Source CMS solutions are based on other Open Source software such as Linux, PHP and MySQL instead of Microsoft's equivalents may make it a tough sell in a corporate IT environment.
• Documentation and support by volunteers can be spotty, after all, they're volunteers. When it's good, it can exceed the response you'd get from a big commercial vendor. When it's bad, it's awful.
• Using add-ons from several sources means having to keep track of updates and patches from each of those programmers instead of a single central vendor.
• While not common, the nature of volunteer Open Source means that a project community can be split over a conflict, causing one group to stop supporting the project or "forking" a new version off the original software.

The leading Open Source CMS packages are listed below, along with their current version number and general technical requirements. The groupings are based on my experience with each program and are naturally subjective; your mileage may vary. Your constructive comments may be incorporated into future versions of this article or into separate articles detailing each of the programs listed.

Market leaders

• Drupal. Current version 6.0. Legacy version 5.7. Requires PHP 4.3.5+, MySQL 3.23.17+ (version 6 will require MySQL 4.1+), Apache 1.3+ or IIS 5+
• Joomla! Current version 1.5.1. Legacy version 1.0.15. Requires PHP 4.4.7+, MySQL 3.23.x+, Apache 1.3+.

Others worth considering

• Plone. Current version 3.0.6. Requires Python 2.4.4+, Zope 2.9.8+ with CMF 1.6.4+.
• CMS Made Simple. Current version 1.2.3. Requires PHP 4.3+, MySQL 3.23.x+ or PostgreSQL 7+.
• MODx. Current version 0.9.6.1. Requires PHP 4.3.10+, MySQL 4.1+, Apache.
• SilverStripe. Current version 2.2.1. Requires PHP 5.2+, MySQL 4.1+, Apache 1.3+, Windows 2000+ or MacOS X 10.4+ or Linux/BSD.
• WordPress. Current version 2.3.3. Requires PHP 4.2+, MySQL 4.0+, Apache mod_rewrite module. Hosting also available with no installation required at WordPress.com.

Not quite free but worth a look

• ExpressionEngine. Current version 1.6.2. Requires PHP 4.1+, MySQL 3.23.32+. Free for non-commercial use with no technical support; commercial license $249.95; some add-ons have additional costs.

Part Three - 2008-The Year of the Open Source CMS

Part One - Overview and Advantages of Content Management Systems

1. CMS tools put you in charge, not your webmaster. You decide when to create new content or update or delete old information. Your site is current and accurate when you want it to be, not when the IT department gets around to it.
2. CMS tools allow you to create multiple users and permission levels, and then assign the updating of specific sections of the site to those users, who may have more direct knowledge of the subjects being covered.
3. CMS software includes many standard "modules" which automate the handling of common web site functions, including creating and editing content, publishing news feeds via RSS, and handling photographs and video content. Available add-on modules can expand your site in almost any way you can imagine, usually with just an hour or two of work, instead of requiring weeks of custom programming. If you've seen something done on a web site, a module is probably available to make it happen on yours.
4. CMS software generally doesn't require special software or new hardware to work. One of its biggest strengths is how easily it scales; since most CMS tools work in a standard web browser window, any number of users can edit and manage the site without needing dedicated web design software installed on every user's computer.
5. CMS doesn't have to be expensive. In fact, while there are excellent commercial CMS solutions (such as Microsoft's SharePoint and IBM's Websphere), the Open Source community has also developed strong, professional CMS software that costs little or nothing to download and implement. Installing and getting the software running properly, plus creating the templates for your own unique web site is still a necessary cost (unless you're familiar with servers, HTML and web style sheets in CSS), but generally small businesses and organizations can be up and running using CMS for a very managable up front cost. Depending on the complexity of your site, you could save hundreds or even thousands of dollars versus web development costs of just a few years ago, and get a more powerful site for the money.

Part Two - Popular CMS solutions