Making PW more userfriendly

[NorbertH]

In this post we had a small discussion about making PW more userfriendly(for new, non developer users)

https://processwire.com/talk/topic/7184-lets-highlight-processwires-ability-to-be-an-enterprise-cms/page-2

Personally i think the technical details belong to another thread, so i opened one.

When you install PW you got basic pages and nothing else at least from the view of a newcomer that is not a developer.

What does a newcomer expect from something that is propagated as being better than WP?

• Basic pages whith more than body and titl. At least they need title, browser title, meta description, publish date controll, a main image, image uploadfield for images in the MCE editor, short text, long text(Tiny MCE), tags, optinally a small gallery for additional images(whith lightbox), an easy option for comments.
• A basic Blog/News system as news and blog can easily be used interchangeably.
• Image cropping on default image fields.
• Premade RSS feed.
• Premade sitemap.
• Premade search.
• A basic form module
• An Image gallery with mass upload, description,title,  title tag, alt tag, fancybox option.
• A Template system for easy template change and an option for modules to link in
• Module installers that are able to deinstall a module completely.(for example the blog module does not)
• Site settings and maybe Template settings
• Simply install and go.

The interesting part is that almost everything from this list is already there in PW.

A few words about PW in general. Im my opinion PW is not a CMS, at least not now. Its a CMF whith an extra comfortable backend , and it really schould be advertised as that right now. Many of the stuff that pepole expect from a CMS is not present (installable templates, modules, calenders...) it has to be build by yourself. Even if thats pretty easy to do, its not click install and go. So its a framework and not a CMS.

Ok, let's look at the reality of most CMS. Either they got far to many modules or they do not have enough modules. Many modules are unmaintained or broken or lack some important functionality. Often installation of any module or updating the CMS breaks a lot of things. even paid modules often come whith lots of problems inside plus you  literally have to test hundreds of modules before you find a combination that is functional, compatible and affordable.

So from this point of view PW is even better than any CMS, as almost all  stuff is build with plain core functionality, but still its a framework not easy to understand by a user.

So what do we need to make it a CMS? The keyword is standarisation. An user does not want 100 ways to make a news page, he exactly wants 1 way to do that. Its great if you easily add some fields but basically he just wants a news page.

Standarisation does not need to take away freedom, it only allows to make components that interact in certain defined ways.

Standarisation can never be perfect but it can help alot in interaction between different parts.

If we look at PW templates there are endless ways to get the result you want so its almost impossible to make a module that creates at least a halfway decent looking default template for its functionality that links into the basic site structure. Would it be bad to create a standrard way for making templates that allows modules to link in ? Would it be bat to have a bunch of default modules that allow templatebuilders to produce templates that already have a well made formating at least for this few modules.

You still have the option to do it the way you like, you can build your own stuff or just modify the existing stuff but in addition to that  you now got the option of installing a few modules, buy a template, do a few modifications and you page is ready. So it even adds more freedom to the system not less.

Lets take a look at WP.

Most templates only support the basic blog and maybe a few modules. as soon as you start to install additional modules you either have to live whith an often ugly default output and often it  fails completely. So you start modifying the template or even worse you need to modify the module. The next module update kills all your changes and you have to start over.... The fun starts if you have a bunch of modules that need modification .

A big company called Templatemonster has a solution for that problem. They sell WP themes that are a complete installation bundled with all the necessary modules and all addons fully functional, but don't try to upgrade the WP system, simply don't do this.

Maybe this is the perfect way for PW to make premade templates ? I guess not. You still run into trouble if you want to change the look of your page. But still it may be an idea to earn some money whith PW. at least i would pay for a nice installation package whith blog and gallery and a really nice modern template with some color, background  and logo control in the backend.

For the easy creation o something like that we would need an extended Profile Module that allows to store a complete page as an installlable Profile. Right now i had some trouble storing multilanguage support and pre generated user and a few other things.

So i guess the best way would be to define a bunch of standard modules, define a default way to do templating and  for interaction between modules and templates.

More about that tomorrow(more technical details ), i need a bed right now

[diogo]

So what do we need to make it a CMS? The keyword is standarisation. An user does not want 100 ways to make a news page, he exactly wants 1 way to do that. Its great if you easily add some fields but basically he just wants a news page.

What you described here is the opposite of PW. Call it what you want, but if these are your requirements for a tool to call itself a CMS, than PW is not —and won't be— one. This can happen with site profiles though. We only have to wait that they appear, and they will with time.

[argos]

@Norbert: Spot on, this is exactly my opinion too. Except for the analogy with TemplateMonster packages. I don't think it's wise to follow that path, because of the negative aspects you mention yourself. But it should be possible to incorporate Regular Page, News/Blog, Forms, Gallery functionality into the core, that won't break after upgrades. Styling should be done apart from the core.

@Diogo: Norbert is talking about a new user who is not a developer who likes to dive into code ocean to get wet. He is refering to ordinary users who want to build sites, who have enough HTML/CSS, etc skills to do so, but only lack coding skills. I agree with him that PW should offer at least some standard basic fetaures, ready to rock and roll. And be able to get up a site without much ado. En when he wants, there are many options to explore.

It's just not user friendly to offer a CMS or framework where a new user is confronted with a blank slate and tons of options, but all must be build by himself, based on hundreds of scattered information chunks on forums, and websites. It's not that PW will decrease in value for developers, if non-devs are also catered for. If you want to get them on board, you need to give them a big hand. Unless you are perfectly happy with the status of having built a very cool and powerful, but also very complex system, that is only really usable by coders. In that case you can lock this topic right away.

[diogo]

But it should be possible to incorporate Regular Page, News/Blog, Forms, Gallery functionality into the core, that won't break after upgrades.

And what else should be in the core? Forum? E-commerce? Local finances tax systems? Should we vote and have in the core the most popular features? Or should we leave the core light and efficient so that even an average developer can quickly create any of those for their clients? Should PW be aimed at the regular Joe that wants a blog like all the others in one day, or should it be aimed at the regular Joe that is willing to pay a competent PRO to create a customised solution?

He is refering to ordinary users who want to build sites, who have enough HTML/CSS, etc skills to do so, but only lack coding skills

There are dozens of good CMSs made especially for that public, like http://www.couchcms.com/ or http://www.surrealcms.com/ or even http://grabaperch.com/ . These tools don't try to be more than that. They have a focus, they follow it, and they do it well.

Unless you are perfectly happy with the status of having built a very cool and powerful, but also very complex system, that is only really usable by coders. In that case you can lock this topic right away.

Pw is actually a very simple system (in the way you mean it), but yes, it is directed at coders and everyone willing to learn a bit of code. But it's not only usable by coders, they are only intermediaries who make it usable by anyone with a business who wants a website. In that context, the potencial users that know HTML/CSS but are not willing to learn a bit of PHP become a much smaller percentage.

[argos]

The topic subject was how to make PW more user friendly. There are valuable suggestions given. But you simply sweep them from the table, because users "should learn a bit of code".

This is why I find it often so hard to really communicate with coders. They often look down on non-coders. You really think that people who cannot code, are simply too lazy to learn, do you?

I had hopes PW would become a major player in the field of both small and large complex sites, but it seems I was wrong. It's a coders' tool. And it seems like some influencial people here go to great lenghts to keep it that way. Too bad.

[cstevensjr]

User-Friendly is very subjective, what's hard for someone is easy for another person.  PW requires (and rightly so) that you invest some time in learning the basics (PHP, Jquery, CSS and HTML).  These are skills you need anyway to be productive and secure when dealing with a modern day website.  Without knowledge of how things work (i.e PHP, Jquery, CSS and HTML), you will never be able to realistically maintain a website.

I sincerely hope PW is not "user-friendly" to the cookie-cutter variety out there.  They will never take the time to learn the basics, because everything about web development/design is all magic to them.  This will most certainly kill this wonderful forum with numerous and countless issues that are entirely based on their refusal to learn simple processes.  That would be a shame and will hopefully be resisted.

Suggestions on how to improve PW are encouraged and actively discussed on this forum.   I enjoy reading the diversity of opinions and concepts.  In 2 short years PW has blossomed.  I originally had problems understanding why the PW palette was so open, but as time went on and I relearned PHP, Jquery, CSS and HTML I came to respect and appreciate PW. 

I have read the forum every day for these 2 years.  I can say that I never did that with any other software.  I hope that we don't inadvertently kill this golden goose on the magical chase for "user friendlyness" and more users.  The funny thing is, no matter how "user friendly" PW gets, someone will always think it can be more friendly.  That's just human nature at work.   To me, PW is already very user friendly and useful.  Every client of mine that has seen PW has been happy working with it.

[diogo]

I'm giving my opinion as much as you are, right? I wasn't a coder when I started playing around with pw, I was a graphic designer that knew a little of html, but liked PW because I understood that it was more flexible than other easier systems. All I'm saying is that, from the moment you understand that you have a powerful tool in your hands, either you are willing to learn it or you don't. Both choices are perfectly fine. I'm not looking down to anyone, and I'm sorry if it came out that way. Again, just giving my personal and absolutely independent opinion.

[muzzer]

But it should be possible to incorporate Regular Page, News/Blog, Forms, Gallery functionality into the core, that won't break after upgrades.

Have to agree with diogo here. Where does it end? I'd like an invoicing and time-keeping aspect, perhaps a jquery gallery? Anyone else want some goodies?

The beauty of PW to me is that the core is light, quick and is actually pretty easy to get you head around once you delve a little out of your comfort zone. The API is superb and allows you to do so much so easily, add modules and you have the perfect base. Please, it's not broken stop trying to fix it ;-)

[argos]

You guys keep repeating that you must be "willing to learn". As if it were that simple. If you don't have coding abilities, you will never leanr, no matter how hard you try. I have been trying to learn PHP for the last 10 years. My skill are still VERY limited. I can only tweak some stuff by trial and error. I just don't have the ability for it. I never understood math on school either, no matter how hard I studied and tried.

Man, I wish with all my heart I could code. My life as website creator would be som much easier. But the truth is, I am limited by my ability. Not by lazyness or unwillingness to learn PHP.

I am not blaming anyone for creating a tool for developers. But I think I understand enough of PW to see that with a little extra work by the devs, PW could be so much more than just a coder tool. Just some basic built-in allround functions like news, blog, pages and forms is needed to transform it from a developers thing, to an allround CMS with a giant bonus for anyone who can and wants to code. Making this valid observation ridiculous by asking sarcastically if PW also should have a forum, ecommerce and a tax system is not a very helpful attitude.

The subject of this topic is making it more user friendly, not making it more dev friendly. Unless you think PW is only for devs. In that case you can close this topic, as I said before, and you can feel all warm and fuzzy about yourself being clever enough to understand this system.

[diogo]

Last reply for today, and only because I sneaked in the phone when I shouldn't anymore

if you are a professional site creator, and want to do it well, honestly you have two options: or you partner with a coder or you become a coder. As you said, it will make your life much easier. If you want to become a coder, in my opinion there's no better tool than PW, and no better place than this forum. I hope you won't feel discouraged by this talk, and that you stick around. start with the basics, without hurrying, and I'm sure that in some months you will be surprised with how much you learned.

[SiNNuT]

How does one define a Content Management System?

Topic starter has his own set of criteria, others may have other. To my mind ProcessWire (PW) is a great content management system, on top of a rock-solid framework and API. Modeling your content exactly the way you want and managing it in the PW back-end couldn't be easier, while still remaining very powerful.

Where i notice a slight disconnect with some users, is that PW does not make any assumptions on the way you display that content on the public facing part of your website. The soon to be released PW 2.5 does give you some good site profiles to choose from, including a multi-language profile. Studying the code in the /site/ directory will give you a very good basis to understanding how you can interact with your managed content. I see this freedom as a major strength, and not a weakness.

If you go from this it will only take a very minimal understanding of PHP to customize things to your needs. For common needs that you might not be able to code yourself in the beginning, like navigation structures or forms, there are really great modules available on the website. A thing to remember is that, because it's all just PHP and some API instructions, everything you do learn will all make you  a better website builder / aspiring coder in the long run.

There might be systems that are more point and click friendly, but sooner rather than later every project needs some customizations and for that i can't think of a better tool than PW.

So -while not needed- some programming skills will help you to get the most out of PW but to discredit it as a developers tool only is not exactly fair in my opinion. That is not to say that PW could not be made (even) more newbie friendly, but i see this more of a task for third-party profiles and/or modules and not something the ProcessWire core project should really aim for.

[Beluga]

You guys keep repeating that you must be "willing to learn". As if it were that simple. If you don't have coding abilities, you will never leanr, no matter how hard you try. I have been trying to learn PHP for the last 10 years. My skill are still VERY limited. I can only tweak some stuff by trial and error. I just don't have the ability for it. I never understood math on school either, no matter how hard I studied and tried.

Man, I wish with all my heart I could code. My life as website creator would be som much easier. But the truth is, I am limited by my ability. Not by lazyness or unwillingness to learn PHP.

Continuing on this slightly off-topic path, but may I ask, how you have tried to teach yourself PHP? I'm asking because I've recently been trying to learn it more systematically myself. I'm not a math guy either, but I really don't think it matters as we are not trying to build game engines or graphics algorithms here.

From what I gather, you are concerned with display logic code and not stuff that would require you to grasp object oriented programming. When I built sites with Joomla's CCKs, I had to learn how to create display logic, too. Combined with the point'n'click interfaces and Joomla's templating system and framework, it was a lot more to learn than PW. Have you customized the way Joomla or K2 display stuff in the PHP template level? Do you find it easier than PW?

To display stuff with PW you have to know

1. what are variables
2. how to do if statements
3. how to use foreach
4. echo
5. how to use PW selectors
6. maybe how to create and call a function (or not)

Maybe the trickiest of these (for me at least, to get the syntax right) are the PW selectors, is it true for you? Or is it something other that is difficult?

I agree that the opaqueness of how programming is done today is a real problem and I'm happy to see people like Bret Victor and Chris Granger wanting to solve it. But a little display logic sprinkled on top of HTML is in a completely different league and not really suffering from this.

[NorbertH]

The funny thing about standarisation is that, if done well, you don't need much of it.

Lookt at the templates:

Just have a default instalation that uses Ryans main.php in your templates and you are done. Now modules can create template files that bring their default formating into the main page.

Now for the modules:

For the modules the only standard must be, if you create template files you  have to put the name of the module in front of the file name like: blog_display_categories.php. If those template files already exist then don't overwrite as the template designer already made some files for this module.

Does someone really thing this would kill PW ?

Using main.php ist the better way anyway.

What it does is, it opens a whole new world of  exchangeable templates.

If you do this little standarisation you can create modules that work like new pepole would expect .

Another few things that should be done:(At least in my opinion).

• Have a simple stripped down version of the commercial Form module(Form generation is an impossible nightmare for users and not being able to make a contact form is a killer criteria)
• Have a default install whith a nice looking full featured basic template

If we modify a few modules to comply to the Standard above we don't even need many additional modules in the default install .

Just a nice made basic page whith some features.

And again it would be extremely helpfull if Ryan would extend his Profile module so it can save a full installation as profile. That would make creating a ful featured CMS out of PW extremely easy. That way it could even be a community project. Right now creating fully featured Profiles looks like a lot of work(users, language support...), correct me if i am wrong.

[pwired]

The real problem here is that for some people processwire looks very unfamiliar to them in the beginning
and never get out of that state of mind. A blind beginners spot so to speak not letting them see how easy
processwire really is. It happened to me so I know what I am talking about. The only solution is to go
through the tutorials and work them out, or experiment on your own e.g. find free picture slide shows
out there and try to implement them in processwire, for one example.
Thing is once you get out of that beginners state of mind blind spot, you can not understand why you
haven't seen the concept of processwire in the beginning. Sounds familiar ?

Happens with many other things in life, right ?

@diogo: Norbert is talking about a new user who is not a developer who likes to dive into code ocean to get wet.
He is refering to ordinary users who want to build sites, who have enough HTML/CSS, etc skills to do so,
but only lack coding skills.

If you have enough html/css skills you can already use processwire. With processwire you can directly
use your html/css experience in any way you have learned it in the past.

It's just not user friendly to offer a CMS or framework where a new user is confronted with a blank slate and tons of options,

but all must be build by himself,

A blank slate and tons of options. But this is exactly why processwire is chosen over other cms'es !!

Many other cms'es let you only grow with what is possible with a certain cms, limitation !
I tried many other cms'es before and all of them had a wall I was going to hit sooner or later.
Talking about frustration. One cms had this right but something else not. All the cms'es I tried
had something right and something wrong. There seemed to be no cms having only the goods

of all the other cms'es.

based on hundreds of scattered information chunks on forums, and websites.

This is only a matter of time in the beginning. Setup a location (folder) and save there
all your snippets of html, css, php, js, etc. that you find scattered in the forum and on
the internet. Many people work with a snippet folder for re-usable html, css, php, js, etc.
And the more you use them, the less you fall back on them because this is an automatic
learning process.

The topic subject was how to make PW more user friendly. There are valuable suggestions given.
But you simply sweep them from the table, because users "should learn a bit of code".

Let's see, how much php code does a beginner really need to know (already discussed before)
to make websites with processwire:

1. href="<?php echo $config->urls->templates?>styles/your_css_style.css" />

2. src="<?php echo $config->urls->templates?>scripts/your_java_script.js">

3. <?php echo $page->your_field; ?>

4. foreach
   echo "html and code";

So it's actually 4 things a beginner has to know and there isn't much to learn here
just follow a simple format, that is all.

From there you can simply grow into php as far as your website really needs it.

[arjen]

The real problem here is that for some people processwire looks very unfamiliar to them in the beginning and never get out of that state of mind. A blind beginners spot so to speak not letting them see how easy processwire really is. It happened to me so I know what I am talking about.

Exactly my experience too.

[mr-fan]

Such discussions are very difficult for non native speakers but i try my best to harm nobody.

since Norbert and Argos were members of my former community, too i have some thoughts on this topics and maybe the reasons of such wishes...

We all came from a former real big community with worldwide devs and contributors.

The former CMS we used was one of the real big ones that was in use, but in lack of marketing and a scary name "WebsiteBaker" it was not so big public visible.....kinda like PW too.

This websitebaker was a great cms (now development is stagnate for the last years) with a easy mediaadministration, simple templatesystem (php), pagetree, one site could have a different template and unlimited sectionblocks where a sectionblock was a addon like a form, gallery, wysiwyg, poll and so on. Cons are that every addon produce own HTML output, not easy to setup, update for a dev.

-> But easy to get a website up and running fast.....with strong borders and limits.

-> Former CMS was like a setup a db -> install -> install a template ->install some addons ->fast result!

But Processwire is a different thing and i've to strict confirm the "hero" and "distinguished" members on theire points!

Just some background on my person the short story:

- i'm a web-hobbyist,

- i studied agrobusiness,

- my family have a little farm in southgermany,

- i work in a ngo,

since a couple of years i've a small business helping people - especially from the agrobusiness to get a more "pro" website up and running than a "standard hoster websitebuilder" could even with a small budget and the very most important thing easy to use/update so they get along.

My understanding for OpenSource was always that if you use such piece of code you have two options 1. contribute with your time 2. spend money to push such good work!

Since my projects all have a small budget (with some less exceptions) i always try to invest some spare time to contribute, help in forum, try to code something....(In former CMS i was a forummod, wrote several tutorials, assisted several addondevs with translations and testing, started a project for a portable version with preinstalled version on a WAMP server2go)

I've not a webdevbusiness to make a living - but since i'm a economist i understand one simple goal/rule:

What is good for the client is usually good for me if i running a service with one big exception -> if the good thing is that the client don't need my work anymore!

So we talk about "make it userfriendly" or "make it devfriendly" ?

i think processwire is a great tool for both devs and users, since i could make the website (and the backend) for my clients real userfriendly without limitation like other cms have. So it is "friendly to me" and after all my work it is "friendly to the enduser"...

So what do we need to make it a CMS? The keyword is standarisation. An user does not want 100 ways to make a news page, he exactly wants 1 way to do that. Its great if you easily add some fields but basically he just wants a news page.

I don't think that standarisation would be good here - i like particularly that a pro user could adapt a MFC template system and a nonpro like me use a simpler technique.

Yes PW more a CMF than a CMS but this is great for everybody that creates professional websites or even apps.

@Argos: i think there is a big misunderstanding about the "user" - i think you mean with user -> somebody that use/install/build a site with PW? but i think others here might think user -> client that use/work with a fine adjusted ready to work installation of PW?

No offend to you (i honor your work that i know from the last couple of years) and like i said it is hard in a non native language but i try to ask: Since i'm a complete self educated person (no design education, no programming edu) i think that in current times of webdesign nobody without some skills in coding or a partner that devellops for him could stand in the long-range. We live in times of using explicit combination of javascript (if not required for a website - but surely for a app or mobile website), serverside javascript via node.js is on the way, the morst good CMS all works with PHP or even a own language like typo3, preprocessors for CSS like SASS and LESS, JSON data for serving different things, imagehandling for responsive design and so on...

since we work with computers and software - all is code - i thought even drawing is just math?

@Norbert: there could be indeed more examples, easyer entries for new users -> that wanna try out PW and install it. But hey that is something to do - nothing to write about it. I know you are a experienced programmer so you've no problems to setup a website for a customer "userfriendly" so why this is such a big topic? For my first project i take the time to setup the most things you've mentioned so i can recycle them easy for the next ones...

PW is hard for the first beginning - if - you don't search the forum, don't look at the example code in the templates, read a lot of posts, dig through the doc is fun while you learn fast....the tuts in the wiki are old but working.

To change this only simple things are to do.

Take the 2.5 create template and fields and use the export - share it - so a new user easy get it work with one click and import such examples like a setup for a calendar, news and so on. Or write some tutorials.....if my first project is finished i will do share my learning for other newbees...like other users here did before.

@all former other CMS users: PW will/should never be like a other CMS or your former used CMS. Just switch your minds and start to change the way you thinking before - and you will be surprised.

• I felt in love with pw in lets say about a 30 minutes trial
• I get the first grasp until lets say the next 3 hours
• I belief i'll stay for ever in the status Newbee since every day i read this forum i'll learn new things from this great community

Best regards - Martin

[Joss]

The dange is in making PW user-friendly for non-devs it suddenly becomes very unfriendly for developers.

A major mistake we all make is comparing ProcessWire to AMS (Article management systems) like Wordpress and Joomla.

The point is that ProcessWire, as presented on this site, is not that type of system - it is a content management framework that allows developers to build the CMS or AMS of their own design.

Because of the profile system, it would be perfectly possible to build a WordPress clone on top of ProcessWire that would probably be faster and stronger than WordPress - but this would then be a different product "based" on ProcessWire and should have its own related identity, own support structure, own developers and so on.

Likewise, I think Apesia's shop module could be expanded hugely into a full profile that again would warrant it's own site, support and so on.

But these would not be the core framework that is ProcessWire and should be separate systems and not replace PW.

[Thomas108]

Dear Processwire folks.

For me as a non coder, this is a very important discussion, therefore I would like to add my 2cts for your evaluation.

What I would really love to see in PW is a one page code documentation, just like the twitter bootstrap docs.

A page with just some basic styles so that any newbie, or non coder can see at a glance which code does what!

Something like this:

INCLUDE HEAD (OR OTHER EXTERNAL PHP FILES):
**************************************************
php include ("./head.inc.php");
_________________________________

NAVIGATION WITH DROPDOWN:
Home | Page 1 | Page two
Dropdown 1
Dropdown 2
**************************************************
php $ function bla bla
_________________________________

DISPLAY IMAGES:
image-1.jpg
Image-2.jpg
**************************************************
php $ foreach bla bla
_________________________________

DISPLAY FIELD(S):

Example Field title
Eample field body

**************************************************
php $ echo bla bla
_________________________________

And then of course more advanced stuff.

In fact, if there would be a simple styleguide, many developers could contribute to this document over time.

If one has made something fancy and wants to share it, he or she can submit the documentation code to a moderator who adds it to the document.  

Please, what do you think about this??

Thomas108



 

[Martijn Geerts]

@Thomas108, something like this: http://wiki.processwire.com/index.php/Basic_Website_Tutorial

Thanks Joss

[mr-fan]

To keep a positive idea in this heavy ideological topics

I like the idea of a snippet gallery this would be a nice addition on the tutorials for beginners?

With the 2.5 it should be possible to export needed fields and templates and show some example calls on that fields.....so it would be a easy start.

Like i wrote the wiki tuts was great but old and not really linked with the current docs.

A dev use the great API documentation and the cheatsheet!!

But a newcomer has to search the forum (and hopefully since the forum search isn't that good find first this or this post)

[onjegolders]

Maybe the OP is right about one thing, it is good to know who you are and what you are and I think clearly if there "has" to be a choice, then ProcessWire would be a tool for web developers rather than a plug and play system. 

Could it be both? Possibly, and as more profiles come about, the community will grow but I don't think we will ever see Ryan deviating from his beliefs and they have got him an awful long way towards what is probably the best PHP content framework on the market.

The other point is, as Diogo says, there are an awful lot more systems out there that appeal to the OP's market than Processwire and although that isn't necessarily a reason to shun that market, I'm pretty happy with where the system is at the moment and direction its headed.

[onjegolders]

Also as another point, and I've been thinking about doing this.

There's nothing preventing the creation of various modules that do make certain assumptions.

A blog module could install templates, fields and even a basic stylsheet that could incorporate a blog into an existing site. There is definitely more room for these "bundles". Perhaps the reason there aren't more of them is that the majority of PW users prefer to make everything from scratch.

But these bundles shouldn't harm that existing community as long as they are addons. 

PS: 

Did you get a makeover Joss?

[NorbertH]

I just wanted to remind that this discussion originated in the question how to get PW more widespread.

Its a decision to say No this is a framework this stays a framework but this will completely stop availability for mass users, then it must be advertised a as a framework and not as a CMS. That would be perfectly ok. Its a decision that is up to Ryan. 

Having no options for commercial templates  that can link into it is a big minus and no way to build modules that rely on a few standards and can be easyly installed inside the basic installation will stop quite a lot of professionals.

The most wired thing is that with a few minor standards all this problems are solved.

I hope you read my previous post about templates and modules ?

The is no change in PW core necessary at all, just a better default Profile, and a few minor modifications on some modules to make lots of pepole happy  whith PW.

And i really would like to see PW becomming as popular  as WP, Drupal or Typo  as its the far better solution.

[Joss]

I personally would not welcome PW becoming as popular as WP, and there is no need for it to be so.

It is not competing with the mass market appeal of wordpress as it is in a completely different market sector.

Huge numbers of users does not equate to a good product, just an overused one.

It is not possible to have commercial templates for PW as it has no templating system - how would you know what people call their fields? Do you want to tie people down to only one sort of field name/type/strategy? Do you want to restrict people on how they construct templates? Many of the devs in here do not use a header/footer type system. As soon as you introduce a templating layer (Like Joomla has, for instance) where if you want to do something completely different you have to bung in a ton of overrides, you now have a bulky, slow system again. The advantage of PW is that this is completely missing - this is a good thing.

As for standards, everything is built on the API and PHP - that is ALL standards. Any professional can build modules quickly and easily, though for most things like galleries, dancing frogs, and the rest there is no need whatsoever. Why limit people to restrictive module systems when they can just go and grab ANY bit of JavaScript out there and simply drop it in?

As I said before, if you want to use PW as a WP clone, then create a profile that has all that sort of functionality - but that is a different product, not PW itself.

[onjegolders]

Completely agree with Joss.