

SiteCake: Tiny, simple, flat-file, drag and drop CMS - potatron
http://sitecake.com/

======
zapt02
Having all kind of issues with this. Dropped in a subfolder
(/var/www/html/sitecake)

The following AJAX errors are everywhere: Strict Standards: Non-static method
String::insert() should not be called statically, assuming $this from
incompatible context in
/var/www/html/services/application/cake/libs/debugger.php on line 398

Strict Standards: Non-static method Configure::read() should not be called
statically in /var/www/html/services/application/cake/basics.php on line 213

Warning (512): SQL Error: 1030: Got error 28 from storage engine
[CORE/cake/libs/model/datasources/dbo_source.php, line 684]

It just doesn't work, which is a shame.

~~~
nikolamircic
Hey how did you get this? Sitecake is not using cake, SQL or aything you've
mentioned. Please download Sitecake from our webiste and try again.

~~~
capsule_toy
Looks more like a configuration issue. The big clue is s/he dropped your code
into a sub-directory but s/he's getting error in code not in that sub-
directory (i.e. - not your code).

My guess is the docroot is set to /var/www/html with CakePHP server
configuration.

------
mindbreaker
[http://sitecake.com/demo/](http://sitecake.com/demo/) File not found.

~~~
potatron
Maybe it broke; it's designed for small sites after all... sorry, I'm new to
HN. I didn't realize it'd get that much exposure that quickly. :(

~~~
mtw
Maybe a security issue? Someone from HN accessed the code?

------
nikolamircic
Sorry guys, server was overwhelmed by ProductHunt and Hacker News visits. We
did demo part 'lean way' so it could not cope with uploaded content. It should
work now!

------
erikb
The basic idea is awesome. Because the demo doesn't work: Do you support
markdown text? Or is it a wysiwig editor that expects you to click buttons
above the text editor to get something formatted?

~~~
nemexy
Something like a wysiwig editor. I didn't tried markdown, but it didn't look
like supporting it. Small change was pretty easy to make but I didn't play
with bigger changes or dropping something more heavy.

I guess we will see when the demo is back online or you can install it
somewhere to try it out. It looked pretty good.

------
jbrooksuk
In the first code block (how to install) you have the "pretty" (”) quote style
rather than just ".

~~~
potatron
Just to be clear, I'm not the original author. It's just something I've been
using with success for mom & pop style websites and felt it was underexposed
for being so simple (and free to boot).

~~~
baldfat
Once I read it I thought this is exactly what I would use for friend projects.
Personally I find most web tech to be a horrible hack and don't enjoy working
on it. This would be quick and easy and allows me to just hand off quickly.

------
rezacks
DEMO: File not found.

------
thekevan
This didn't seem like much of a CMS to me, more like an editor.

------
nikolamircic
We wanted to stay simple as possible and use wide spread technologies. So HTML
pages for templates, PHP for server side, file system for storage and drag and
drop for editing.

------
nubela
Cool, how does it work?

~~~
potatron
Basically you just mark out some <div> tags as class="sc-content", and they'll
become drag&drop WYSIWYG editable. The changes get written right back into the
file, so you don't need anything other than PHP 5.4 and write permissions. You
can even remove the SiteCake file again, and your site will just keep working
(as static HTML).

~~~
nubela
Amazing, thanks for this. This is one of the rare cases when PHP as a language
shines for a use-case like this.

------
tomerific
It is me or does this feel like WordPress?

------
mrmondo
Remember it still requires a PHP application server to run with how
exploitable (and often heavy) PHP is - I'd be hesitant to call it 'simple'.

~~~
jtreminio
Do you have examples of PHP's exportability and heaviness, or are you just
repeating words?

~~~
mrmondo
Sure, not exactly hard to find though...

\-
[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/31/want_to_have_your_se...](http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/31/want_to_have_your_server_pwned_easy_run_php/)

\- "Over 78% of PHP installs are insecure" \-
[http://blog.ircmaxell.com/2014/12/php-install-
statistics.htm...](http://blog.ircmaxell.com/2014/12/php-install-
statistics.html)

\- [http://stackoverflow.com/a/1567392](http://stackoverflow.com/a/1567392)

~~~
jtreminio
Note that the theregister.co.uk link points back to ircmaxell's blog.

The SO link is for an answer from 2009, pointing to an email from 2006.

ircmaxell's blog is spot on - if you actually bother to read what it says. Not
keeping a very important part of a webserver up to date with security releases
is insecure. Is that a surprise to you, or anyone?

Is Windows or OSX or Linux insecure because they have security patches coming
out all the time? What's insecure is user behavior when they keep running old,
unpatched versions of software.

You're spreading FUD, repeating words and showing links without actually
taking the time to understand the message they are trying to convey.

Case in point: PHP being "heavy". A PHP app can be as lightweight or as heavy
as you need it to be. The more you build and the more it does, the "heavier"
it becomes. If you throw a proper caching solution at a codebase, it becomes
much better, but this is true for anything.

Look at the TechEmpower Benchmarks [0] - PHP raw is usually towards the
middle, upper-middle of the pack. Of course, it gets handily beaten by
compiled and multi-threaded languages.

[0]
[https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/](https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/)

