I found the PHP based CMSs such as Joomla and Drupal required a lot of work to set up compared to the Ruby based CMSs I've tried. I suspect its because of a programmer bias rather than a content editor bias. I do know PHP products can be easy to set up and use: Wordpress is an example of that. You can use Wordpress as a "CMS" if you squint a little, and its one of those 'elastic band' things where you can put more effort into it and uncover more options and plugins and if you are programming inclined customise it at the code level. And so too with the Ruby CMSs. I just think Ruby is easier to understand and the RoR model easier to work with, but that's me, and I'm biased and think that when I do put the effort in I want something productive rather than just wallowing in editing code. http://www.exist.com/blog/five-popular-ruby-rails-based-cms#.UjhFS1Qz7cs Most RoR CMSs work out of the box because they are implemented as GEMS - library modules in effect, and I've found it easy to set up templates. Certainly easier than when I tried with Drupal. "Radiant" seems to be the reference standard, although right now it is behind the curve as it is being completely rebuilt for Rails3. If you can live with running the 0.9 with Rails2 then it has a fantastic number of plugins available. And they aren't, as is the case with something like Wordpress, variations on a theme -- they are different and are useful. If I were starting over, I'd try "Locomotive" first and hope that https://github.com/svenfuchs/adva-cms2 works out soon. http://blog.arunace.com/12-ruby-on-rails-content-management-systems-cms/ -- "Context is everything" -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org