First thoughts about Django-CMS

Submitted by David Grant on Fri, 2013-09-20 22:46

I just set up a site using Django-CMS over at Pomme d'Api Preschool. Overall, I am pretty impressed. I really like the Django admin interface enhancements as well as the site overlay editing feature. One of the best things it he use of django-filer, a file management tool to manage all the uploads to the site. It's awesome and it makes me want to throw out this home page completely and switch over to Django-CMS. Image handling in Drupal has always sucked and still does. The fact that there was no official media/image handling in Drupal 6 sucks, and it's made worse by the fact that there is no real upgrade path to Drupal 7 for media/images, especially if you're like me and you used the "Image" and "image-assist" modules, two of the most popular modules dealing with images.

Django-CMS is pretty powerful and so far it has allowed me to do pretty much anything I have wanted to do.

Tags:

Comments

Anonymous (not verified)

Sat, 2013-09-21 00:20

After checking the case studies, it seems to suffer from the same pain generic CMSs (like drupal) do: it is slow.

Anonymous (not verified)

Sat, 2013-09-21 03:08

That's what caching is for. You're going to struggle to find a full-featured CMS (full-featured being the key here) building pages on the fly that is as fast as static files or memcache.

Diederik (not verified)

Sun, 2013-09-22 06:36

> it seems to suffer from the same pain generic CMSs (like drupal) do: it is slow.

Yes, I noticed that too. :-( Having used Django CMS in a larger project caching with Varnish or memcache was a pain. Full page caching makes dynamic parts a lot harder to implement.

It all prompted me to investigate new solutions instead, which resulted in www.django-fluent.org CMS. It also supports a plugin-like system, multilingual is being worked on *right now*, and caching is built-in. For an example of the default performance (no additional caching) on a multicore linode VPS, see: http://waka-waka.com/

One thing I have to admit: Django CMS 3 is looking really promising, and their frontend editing is superb.

Anonymous (not verified)

Tue, 2013-09-24 06:46

I'd recommend looking at Feincms. It's basically exactly like Django-CMS only I've found it is much easier to extend. It's based around content types for almost everything. Modifying the page content type to include block level caching is pretty painless.

TomP (not verified)

Sun, 2013-09-22 16:32

I'd be interested to get your response to Mezzanine. When I was looking for a Python CMS, I found Mezzanine to much more usable "out of the box" than Django-CMS. I haven't actually deployed a site based on either yet, but Mezzanine looks like the more promising project right now.

Anonymous (not verified)

Thu, 2013-11-07 17:19

After reading reviews and my initial impression trying both Django-CMS and Mezzanine I started creating a site using Mezzanine. Half way through I ended up switching to Django-CMS.

You can't go wrong with either but Django-CMS feels more natural to me after having used both for awhile.

Mezzanine throws a lot of things in there you may not need or want. So you either have to spend time ripping it out or just more bloat to deal with. The other thing I didn't like about Mezzaine is that they try re-invent how core Django does things like the folder structure. The 3rd thing I found is that it's not as well documented as Django-CMS. 3 strikes and they are out.

Anonymous (not verified)

Fri, 2014-02-21 14:26

You are out of your mind. This clearly show that you do not understand CMSs.

Stephan Wagner (not verified)

Sat, 2013-11-23 07:51

Mezzanine, Feincms and Django-CMS are the three most powerfull Django CMS solutions. Have a look at https://www.djangopackages.com/grids/g/cms/ what best matches your need.

Stephan

Add new comment