(...)
And after customizing Plone for ZopeZen, I have to say its a lot better base to start with on anything CMF related. The skin is now a tenth of the size. -- Andy McKay www.agmweb.ca
I like Plone's graphic design, but after diving into the guts of CMF's default skins and compare them to Plone's I still need to know whether Plone is much more than a set of templates over zpt templates, or not. (I must confess I haven't read any of the documentation but I did installed many of its releases including Andy's installer.) When I look at Plone I see its graphic designer's decisions all over the site. Ok, I know I can chage many of them by modifying the stylesheet, but if want other kind of modifications, if I want to have the commands at different places than its defaults, for instance, I still need to perform them skin by skin, am I right?. In my humble opinion there's still room for a new general-purpose CMF skin that takes over the repetitive tasks during the skin customization process, without the usual constraints that come as a result of being template-based. Something like a skin-control layer that allows developers to focus on features rather on just code, but powerful enough to allow every level of per-case customization, when needed. I agree that Plone has suceeded at driving people's attention to CMF/Zope, but from a developer point of view I should tell, IMHO again, Plone neither can be opposed to CMF, neither Plone is CMF. :) Ausum