7

I've been building an ASP.NET MVC 3 web application for about 11 months now, and I have some content based components that I'd like to separate from the actual HTML views and move to more of a CMS system. This will allow the communications people in my company handle that portion of the content without requiring the web app to be redeployed.

I'm not looking for a full CMS system. I have specific places in the web app where I want to be able to include CMS based content, and I'd like to be able to host a blog on the CMS as well.

Has anyone seen anything similar to this before?

Improve this question
6
  • 1
    There is a list called Related on the right side of this page. Commented Feb 20, 2011 at 4:25
  • Yes, I've seen something similar. You've just described a very generic use case for a CMS. What are you looking for? A CMS that allows you to edit pages and host a blog? You've just described every one of them. ;) Commented Feb 20, 2011 at 6:46
  • A CMS that can do the standard stuff, but is integratable into another web app. Meaning, I want to call methods, etc to pull content into MY app -- I don't want to integrate my app INTO the CMS with modules/widgets/etc. Commented Feb 21, 2011 at 2:49
  • FWIW I have the same requirement, a full-blown CMS would BE the mvc application. I'd like something simple that can easily integrate with AN application without causing too much bloat or adding too many dependencies. Commented Jan 31, 2012 at 18:50
  • David, I have the exact same need. I have content nuggets I need to manage, but do not want to turn over my entire app to a CMS. Have you found a solution? Commented May 18, 2012 at 21:54

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
5

I think you should check Orchard. It is open source CMS build on ASP.NET MVC 3 and default feature set also contains Blogs.

Improve this answer
Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

4 Comments

Are you sure it's based on MVC? I see no reference to MVC in the project description, although I do notice they recently added the creator of the SparkView engine to their team. All it mentions is asp.net. I'm also relatively sure that Orchard has been around for longer than MVC has.
@Mystere Man: I'm not sure if whole Orchard is in MVC but most of parts are. ASP.NET MVC 3 is prerequisity for installing Orchard.
Yes it's built on MVC, nHibernate, Autofac and Castle orchardproject.net/docs/How-Orchard-works.ashx?HL=mvc
And in the meantime, it's also built on .NET Core: github.com/OrchardCMS/OrchardCore
1

You can plug Umbraco v5 into an existing MVC site or an existing MVC site into Umbraco v5. Umbraco v5 is a complete rewrite currently based on MVC3.

Improve this answer

2 Comments

Seeing as Umbraco v5 is canceled, this isn't something I'd recommend anymore.
Checkout Actya and/or BrickPile or AtomicCMS
-1

If you really want a clear separation between the CMS and your site you could always use AJAX to pull the CMS content into your main app's web page and eliminate the server side mingling altogether. I've thought about doing something similar for an app I am working on.

Improve this answer

3 Comments

That defeats the purpose of client side functionality. It is meant to enhance functionality, not add new functionality. furthermore what happens to a user if javascript isn't available? They don't get anything. Also your creating multiple requests = longer page loads.
Actually, using ajax to load page content can shrink your perceived load times. It allows the server to return the response sooner and let subsequent content load in such a way that it's requested only when needed. Content loaded in this fashion is usually some sort of aside, changes less frequently, and can be cached separately from the main content helping to reduce server load. Lack of javascript support is something he'd have to account for but you don't just plug in ajax support on a site, it's a strategy and to do it right takes time. I never said there weren't other considerations.
I agree, however in the context of this question, ajax is not the answer. As a CMS is generally used to maintain all of the content on a page. Therefore you would be loading all of the content, less the layout, via ajax. And yes, it will be perceived as faster, but overall will take more time.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.