 |
 |
Thanks for the suggestions about videos and the Services module. I will give it a look. I am still quite torn overall about whether to stick it out with Drupal or use a framework. Josh Welker -----Original Message----- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Shaun Ellis Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 2:16 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Very frustrated with Drupal Josh, I welcome your initial rant, which was well articulated -- sometimes I can't find anything beyond 4-letter words to express my frustration. It surprises me that there has not been much discussion of Drupal on this list, or even on Drupal4Lib recently -- yet it's so prevalent in Libraries, which seems strange to me. I've been developing with it for about 5 months, and the key thing I've learned in that time is that you HAVE to have a community of other Drupalists to bounce questions at -- perhaps that means going to Meetups, Camps, Cons, etc. Whatever your trying to do, it's likely that someone has already done it. Books are not that helpful in my opinion. For example, in a 700 page book on Drupal 7 Development from Apress, "Views" does not even have an index entry -- so you can imagine how much information/noise is out there. I have found the BuildAModule videos to be exceptional and reasonably priced. I use that regularly. I have also had the benefit of a more experienced colleague helping me navigate, so I can't imagine going it alone. For scenario #2 (exposing your data to other apps), you should look at Services: http://www.lullabot.com/blog/article/content-syndication-using-services-and-feeds I, for one, am looking forward to easy RESTful Web Services in Drupal 8 [1], which will allow me to combine some of Drupal's content modeling power, syndication features, and out-of-the-box admin/permissions features with more cutting edge UI frameworks always seem behind the curve in Drupal. Scenario #1 (the hours page house of cards) is in some ways a feature. If there's a known bug in one of your modules, you can simply update that one little piece. That said, it can be fragile, so you should always test features/updates in a development environment first. You should also be making regular, automated backups of your production (and dev!) code and database so that you can roll back to one that works while you fix what broke. -Shaun [1] http://drupalize.me/blog/201401/introduction-restful-web-services-drupal-8 On 5/15/14 2:03 PM, Joshua Welker wrote: > Nina, > > Thank you for your insights. I'm glad to get a response from someone with > lots of relatively positive Drupal experience. > > As far as functionality problems, I can offer two examples: > > 1. I have a library hours page that pulls information from Google > Calendars with Feeds and redisplays it using Views. In addition to these > two modules, there are a handful more extending them: Dates (and a host of > submodules), Dates iCal, Feeds Tamper, Computed Field, Better Exposed > Filters, and Views Field View (just looking briefly at my modules page). > The hours page works, which is a testament to the Drupal community, but > the whole thing feels like a giant hack. I can barely remember how it all > works. It's like a giant Rube Goldberg device. If it suddenly stops > working, I have about 10 modules to look at to try to find the bug, and > most of those modules are very poorly documented. > > 2. I want to allow a non-Drupal app to harvest some of my Drupal nodes to > mashup into another app that is fairly complex. I have spent several hours > looking at Drupal documentation trying to figure out how in the world to > harvest this data via an API or basic SQL queries, but I am at a total > loss. The Entity API is beyond me. And looking directly at the underlying > MySQL tables, I have absolutely no idea what is what. Fields have their > own tables, and content types are fields. I kid you not. It is the exact > opposite of sane database design. > > I agree with you that rolling a full-fledges CMS is a bad idea and would > be hard to inherit. But inheriting a framework app is apparently not so > bad, from what others here have said. I would have a standard > implementation of authentication in Rails, for instance, and my coworkers > could edit pages, database links, news, etc using WYSIWYG controls. It > would basically be CKEditor taped onto the front of standard CRUD pages > that are one of the most basic tools available in most frameworks. > > I still am not sure what I will do, but I think there is a middle ground > between using an established CMS and forcing anyone editing the website to > dive into raw code. > > Josh Welker > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of > McHale, Nina > Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 10:37 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Very frustrated with Drupal > > Good morning, Josh and everyone, and thanks for the shoutout, Andromeda! > > Josh, I didn't take your OP as abrasive at all. We've ALL been up on that > ledge, man! > > If you know me at all, you know I'm pretty pro-Drupal. Pretty sure I still > have KoolAid stains on my face. This is mainly because I'm a developer, > not a programmer. Ten years ago, I was a reference librarian who stumbled > into web site development and management because my colleague who had > taken care of our website left the organization. This is still a pretty > common scenario for many of us working full-time on library web sites now. > I have absolutely felt all of the pain that is described here--the theme > of my career in recent years is "inherited hacked Drupal 6 sites"--and I > take the point that the Drupal learning curve can be as serious an > investment as learning some of the other languages/frameworks/options > mentioned. > > But. That said, as far as the "bus scenario" (Josh! Nooooooooo!) goes, a > web site developed in The Drupal Way will be much easier for someone else > who is Not A Programmer to take over or assist managing. I assume you're a > solo developer at your organization? If yes, others could continue to > manage things even if, say, you wanted to do something crazy like take a > long vacation. Or help you out with stuff through the UI. I have also > inherited several homegrown CMSs over the years, and I would always take > (weeeelll, with ONE particularly nasty exception) a Drupal site over that > because I have some frame of reference versus something completely hand > written by one person. Also, how future-proof is something you'd write > yourself? Are you willing to take on the security implications and commit > the time (and will your management support your time used that way--don't > burn yourself out!) and effort keeping your code up-to-date, or would it > be better to know that you can lean on the ! > Community for that update to core at the end of each month? All things > to > consider, and as pro-Drupal as I am, I freely admit that it's not always > the right choice. > > Josh, can you describe some of the functionality that you're concerned > about? One of my biggest concerns right now (that I think related directly > to what you're experiencing in your house of cards scenario) about Drupal > use in libraries is that library-specific module development isn't > happening in the "official" Drupal way, by modules getting vetted and > contributed back to drupal.org. (And I know that this is complicated; a > colleague and I did some research on the barriers to contributing code > back.) Anyone with basic knowledge of the Drupal UI can build a pretty > complex site, including adding modules, but if the modules don't exist, > non-programmers aren't left with much. I'm especially concerned about this > as D6 drifts toward EOL, since, the last time I really tallied things up, > anyway, a lot of the really cool stuff that had been developed for > libraries as modules in D6 hasn't made it to D7, with D8 now looming for > late 2014/early 2015. (Previous practice has been to reti! > re the second version behind the new release, i.e., 5 was laid to rest > as > 7 came out, although there has been some discussion about extending the > live of 6 because there's such a critical mass of sites still using it.) > > Some of my evidence for this is anecdotal, too; at Drupalcons in Denver > and Portland, and other birds-of-a-feather Drupal events, I've asked, > "Hey, what if we all coordinated and developed a module for X?" (X=any > number of common web functionality that libraries of any type would find > useful.) And then several people in the room raise their hands and say, > "Yeah, I've done that/I'm working on that!" I ask them if it's on d.o, and > they say "No, but I'll share it..." and then their voices kinda drift off > and they stop making eye contact. The thing is, if the code is "just" put > on GitHub (I've got no beef with GitHub, but it's an audience/user > problem) or shared in any way other The Drupal Way, you've lost a whole > set of potential non-programmer users. (Sidenote: this is on my mind > because I'm writing a proposal for the journal about library-specific > Drupal module development. I think I've just written a good chunk of it. > Thanks, Josh!) > > Finally, I can also add, FWIW, that all of these pains are felt by > developers outside of our library sphere as well. I worked briefly for a > Drupal dev firm, and the amount of time we spent discussing whether or not > we should still be a dedicated Drupal shop, or build/look into other > frameworks, surprised me. The split, as you might imagine, was typically > between the backend developers and sysadmins who were tired of all the > things discussed here, and the developers and graphic design/developer/UX > folks who relied on their existing knowledge of the Drupal UI and theme > layer to get their work done efficiently. > > Nina > > Nina McHale > Digital Experience Consultant > Colorado State Library > > > ________________________________________ > From: Code for Libraries [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Joshua > Welker [[log in to unmask]] > Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 8:47 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Very frustrated with Drupal > > Thank you all for the responses. I hope my original email did not come off > as too abrasive. > > The issue for me is that I am having a hard time figuring out what exactly > is the use case for Drupal. Do you want a dead-simple website? Use > Wordpress. Do you want to add some complex custom apps? Use a framework. > Do you want the worst of both worlds? Use Drupal. Getting a non-trivial > Drupal site up and running requires as much work as learning a > full-fledged framework like Rails, Laravel, or Django. And the experience > you gain using Drupal is not going to carry over at all into any future > non-Drupal endeavors because the Drupal platform is completely unique and > doesn't seem to follow any basic paradigms like MVC. When doing something > like basic data manipulation requires overriding core functions using > custom PHP functions in my theme, the entire point of using a CMS in the > first place has just been defeated. If I get hit by a bus, not only will > someone have to relearn Drupal and all its modules, but they will also > have to wade through my spaghetti-code efforts at patching functionality > into Drupal. > > What I would love is a CMS based on plain SQL tables, ActiveRecord, and > simple CRUD controls instead of abstract "entities" and "fields" that try > to be everything to everyone (and fail to be anything for anyone). But I > don't think such a thing exists, so I am interested in rolling my own with > a framework. > > Right now, my framework choices are narrowed down to Ruby on Rails, > Laravel (PHP), Django (Python), and Flask (Python). For anyone who has > used these, do you have any insight into how maintainable your projects > are and how easily they are managed/inherited by others? > > Josh > > > On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Jason Bengtson > <[log in to unmask]>wrote: > >> When I came into this position I inherited some work the former tech >> manager had done in installing and experimenting with Drupal as a tool >> to replace our current CMS-less ColdFusion environment. I also quickly >> grew unhappy with it. I've been experimenting with MODX, which I like >> so far. If you're a PHP developer, MODX will be of particular interest >> (and PHP is a pretty common server-side technology if you worry about >> the bus factor). I haven't had as much time to mess with it as I'd >> like, but I've built some wireframes with it and so far I like it. >> >> I second the low quality of most of the commercial, enterprise stuff. >> We used Cascade Server at UNM and it was absolutely wretched. It's >> been a long time, but when I last built a WordPress site I remember >> that as being easy to use and I think it's gotten more >> flexible/powerful. I've got a fiend who's really sold on it and HAM/TMC > uses it for their website. >> >> Best regards, >> >> >> >> *Jason Bengtson, MLIS, MA* >> >> Head of Library Computing and Information Systems >> >> Assistant Professor, Graduate College >> >> Department of Health Sciences Library and Information Management >> >> University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center >> >> 405-271-2285, opt. 5 >> >> 405-271-3297 (fax) >> >> *[log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>* >> >> *http://library.ouhsc.edu <http://library.ouhsc.edu/>* >> >> *www.jasonbengtson.com <http://www.jasonbengtson.com/>* >> >> >> >> NOTICE: >> This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom >> it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, >> confidential or otherwise exempt from disclosure. If the reader of >> this e-mail is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent >> responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you >> are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying >> of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received >> this communication in error, please immediately notify us by replying >> to the original message at the listed email address. Thank You. >> <[log in to unmask]> >> >> >> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 8:47 AM, Jason Sherman <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: >> >>> Joshua, >>> >>> From my perspective, the module ecosystem is the greatest strength >>> that Drupal has. Modularity is one of the central design goals of >>> the system, so if you if you want to avoid all third-party modules, >>> you aren't going >> to >>> get any real advantage over something like wordpress. Having said >>> that, I've experienced module dependency hell with Drupal, and it >>> can be frustrating. >>> >>> I tend to take a hybrid approach. I try to limit myself to just a >>> few modules with any site. Things like Views, cck, chaos tools, and >>> entity reference are modules I use for almost any site. For >>> functionality that >> is >>> specific to the site, I usually create a local module to store code >>> and configuration. I find that this kind of setup gives me the most >>> of the advantages of the modules, while limiting the potential for >>> update problems. >>> >>> Another option that a lot of people use is drupal distributions. >>> These >> come >>> with quite a bit of customization for specific use cases ready out >>> of the box. I haven't used a distribution, so I can't speak to >>> their >> usefulness. >>> I'm sure that their quality can vary just as much as modules and > themes. >>> >>> Now for something completely different. Depending on what your >> requirements >>> are, you may have better luck using a narrower-purpose tool for the > job. >>> Have you considered something like SubjectPlus? >>> http://www.subjectsplus.com/ >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Joshua Welker <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: >>> >>>> Warning: incoming wall of text. >>>> >>>> I've been working for the past several months on building a >>>> library >>> website >>>> with Drupal. This is my second try building a website with Drupal. >>>> I >>> chose >>>> Drupal for two main reasons: CCK/content types, and its ubiquity >>>> in the library community. >>>> >>>> Theme development was going relatively well, if a little overly >>>> complicated. But once I started trying to do anything beyond >>>> developing static pages, I have become more and more frustrated with > Drupal. >>>> >>>> Drupal supports custom content types out-of-the-box, which is >>>> great, >> but >>> if >>>> you want to actually do anything with that custom content other >>>> than >> have >>>> it function as a plain page, you have to use the Views module. >>>> Views is great, but views can easily become very complicated, with >>>> custom >>> rewrites, >>>> grouping, relations, contextual filters, etc. Plus, a lot of >>> functionality >>>> in Views requires more modules (for instance, basic data > manipulation). >>>> This is to build rather run-of-the-mill list features like a >>>> database >>> list >>>> or a list of events. And a lot of the advanced features in Views >> require >>> a >>>> solid understanding of SQL (groups, distinct, joins, etc), which >>>> kind >> of >>>> defeats the notion that it is easy for non-developers to administer. >>>> >>>> Now, at this point, I have modules extending my modules. And those >>> modules >>>> have multiple dependencies on other modules. I am getting worried > now. >> It >>>> feels like my website is a house of cards. I've run into several >>> instances >>>> already where one of these plugins is updated and breaks >>>> compatibility >>> with >>>> the whole stack, and there is nothing to do in this case but open >>>> an >>> issue >>>> on the project tracker and pray for the best. I have looked into >> building >>>> my own modules, but the umpteen APIs and hooks required to do >>>> something simple as perform some regex on field data completely >>>> overwhelmed me >>> (and I >>>> am fairly experience with web app development). >>>> >>>> It's not just Views, either. Anything more complicated than static >> pages >>>> and navigation menus requires relying on the module ecosystem. >>>> >>>> Not only is the whole thing quite precarious, but it defeats one >>>> of the >>> two >>>> main purposes of a CMS: ease of administration. I want to know >>>> that if >> I >>>> get hit by a bus tomorrow, someone will be able to come in and >>>> take >> over >>>> without too much difficulty. But when I go back and look at my >>>> views, I >>> can >>>> sometimes barely understand the work I did a week ago. It is very >>> difficult >>>> to keep straight which functions are coming from which modules, >>>> and all those modules have separate (often poor) documentation. >>>> >>>> At this point, I am seriously contemplating dumping Drupal and >>>> moving >> to >>> a >>>> full-fledged framework like Django, Flask, or Laravel and adding >>>> some WYSIWYG CRUD controls for pseudo-CMS functionality. >>>> ActiveRecord-like systems are much easier to use IMO than fiddling >>>> for hours with Views, >>> and >>>> I have full control of what is happening. I honestly think it >>>> would be >>> just >>>> as easy for someone to inherit a custom-built framework app as it >>>> would >>> be >>>> to inherit my already-convoluted Drupal site. At least the >>>> framework is well-documented and should allow my app to be >>>> understandable to anyone >>> with >>>> some programming experience. >>>> >>>> Does anyone want to talk me off the ledge here? I know a lot of >>>> you are using Drupal for your websites. What are the killer >>>> features that keep >>> you >>>> using Drupal? If any of you have experience building websites >>>> using frameworks, what are your experiences? I really want to like >>>> Drupal, >> but >>> it >>>> seems to be more trouble than it's worth. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Josh Welker >>>> Information Technology Librarian >>>> James C. Kirkpatrick Library >>>> University of Central Missouri >>>> Warrensburg, MO 64093 >>>> JCKL 2260 >>>> 660.543.8022 >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Jason Sherman >>> Systems Librarian >>> University of Science and Arts of Oklahoma >>> 405.574.1340 >>> >> > > > > -- > Josh Welker > Information Technology Librarian > James C. Kirkpatrick Library > University of Central Missouri > Warrensburg, MO 64093 > JCKL 2260 > 660.543.8022 > -- Shaun Ellis User Interface Developer, Digital Initiatives Princeton University Library 609.258.1698