As
the Open Source Movement gains momentum, led by the growing popularity
of the Linux operating system, it should come as no surprise that the
number of open source content management products on the market is
growing. What separates companies such as Zope, Lenya , eZ publish, and
Nuke from better-known counterparts at Documentum, Vignette, and
Hummingbird is that the open source products (with a few exceptions)
tend to focus solely on Web content management, rather than enterprise
content management—but that doesn't mean at least some of them aren't
making their way into the ECM space as well.
Open
source vendors—as is the rule in the Open Source Movement—also provide
the code (though not necessarily for free), and companies can do with
it what they will within the terms and conditions of the license.
Usually this means that a company can manipulate the code in order to
develop a CMS that meets particular specifications. On the flip side,
this flexibility also means that open source software packages tend to
be more of a foundation on which to build a CMS, rather than a more
polished "out-of-the-box" solution that comes from mainstream content
management vendors. Although there are typically no licensing fees
associated with open source solutions, requisite customization often
requires intensive in-house development (and probably help from an
outside consultant).
Open source isn't for everybody, but for a
growing number of organizations, taking the open road is the smart
choice. This article takes a look at the open source content management
system landscape and provides some examples of companies operating in
this space.
The Scope of Open Source CM
Most
open source content management packages have been designed to manage
Web content. In fact, according to Scott Goodwin, who runs the Web
site, opensourcecms.com, many were originally developed by small teams
of programmers seeking a way to deliver content. They designed a system
themselves and then made the code available as open source. "Most open
source CMSs were started by some programmer who wanted to easily
add/create/edit content while keeping the content and the design
separated. From there, if the system is any good, it will begin to have
some type of following and other programmers will begin adding to the
core or creating third party modules to extend the functionality,"
Goodwin says.
If you visit opensourcecms.com or cmsreview.com,
you'll find hundreds of open source content management packages.
Goodwin admits that quality can vary dramatically among the numerous
packages, but he points out that many have caught on and are widely
supported.
"Some of these open source CM systems are fantastic,
while others are—how should I say this—less than stellar," says
Goodwin. "Since there is generally no financial motivation for the
initial creation of any open source CMS, the quality can be
questionable. However," he says, "if the system becomes popular and
more people and programmers become involved, the system generally gets
better and better with each iteration. With any popular open source
software, you'll continually capture better and more qualified eyeballs
going over the code, making it stronger, leaner, and more secure."
The
real strength of open source content management is that it reduces the
overall cost of implementation, according to John Blossom, president
and senior analyst at Shore Communications, Inc. "The big picture is
that it means that virtually any company can have a sophisticated Web
publishing infrastructure that takes content out of the realm of
unstructured content for a fraction of what systems cost only a few
years ago. The real money is in solving business problems far more
sophisticated than these tools, but in the meantime these tools are
revolutionizing the ability of sophisticated content to appear
virtually anywhere online or in the enterprise," Blossom says.