Talk:TYPO3

This article was nominated for deletion on 28 July 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the TYPO3 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 3 months

"web content management framework"

The first sentence says TYPO3 is a CMS, but TYPO3 describes itself as a "web content management framework", which I agree with. It's difficult for a non web-developer to build upon TYPO3. What do you think about it? -- Kl4m ^{T C} 18:57, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess Kasper designed that primarily as a flexible framework, but it was tightly integrated with the CMS elements/functions so at the end of the day Typo3 version 4.x IS a CMS which is based on a well thought-of framework. To my knowledge, this framework is only used and utilized by Typo3 at the moment. This tight framework-CMS integration can disapperar with the new Flow3 system, started from scratch. Flow3 is (will be) the next-gen framework, and Typo3 v5.x will be only one CMS 'application', that will be built/running on top of this framework - but other people can built other CMS or non-CMS systems on this new, independent framework logic called Flow3. Hardzsi (talk) 08:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"NPOV: 'one of the leading...'"

First sentence of this entry is derived from TYPO3's marketing materials (via Google search) and is clearly NOT from a NPOV (plus factually quite questionable). Very close to deletable as an advertisement with this lead??

CMS/CMF is industry jargon, with no clear distinction between the two; at the time of release, 'CMS'es were arguably very hard for a non-developer to build upon; and TYPO3 is listed as a CMS by CMSWatch, so I'm not sure there's any way to further clarify in this article.68.217.153.207 (talk)

FrankyBkk: I am new here and hope that I do not break any rule here. But I want to tell you that I think that the TYPO3 article was for me very informative. And that TYPO3 is one of the leading CMS is just the Truth. What you expect that they write instead? TYPO3 is a CMS and that was it? It have in my opinion nothing to do with marketing, specially because TYPO3 is under the GNU Licence and totaly for free. To say that TYPO3 is one of the leading CMS'es is just a information for the reader. If they would say that they are THE leading CMS then would it be in my opinion a break of rules. I think that it is much more important to give a lot of informations to the readers of the Best Online Encyclopdia on earth as to look into every word that it is conform with the rules. Oops, I think it is not allowed to say that Wikipedia is the best one?

I think it is just not fair to delete this sentence.

FrankyBkk (talk) 05:57, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To-Do: Update several sections

I just discovered how big the differences between this and the german version are. I already updated the TypoScript section, but I think that several other parts need maintenance. The de.WP version is very thorough, while the english one misses a lot of valuable facts. So...my suggestions:

Design: Rename to "Architecture" and merge updated information from the Funktion und Architektur part from de.WP
CLA for TYPO3 version 5: Why is the CLA mentioned with a whole paragraph, although TYPO3 5 (TYPO3 Phoenix) hasn't been mentioned before? Suggestion: Label the paragraph TYPO3 v6 / Phoenix, add information about v6, why it is special and mention CLA briefly.
Translate & insert the version history table.
[EDIT] Briefly explain the caching framework
Briefly mention the 1-2-3 installer
Insert section criticism (Too complex, need to learn TypoScript, cryptic etc.)

Any ideas or objections? --Jesus Presley (talk) 16:27, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I added a lot of information. If someone could please check if the recently added sections are still complying with WP standards? As I use TYPO3 myself, some details might appear NPOV. --Jesus Presley (talk) 21:08, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

End of maintenance for 4.5 LTS?

typo3.org/download clearly says 4.5 LTS (long term support) will be supported to April 2014 (2014-04), not October 2014. If that is incorrect, please provide some source of information! /PatrikN (talk) 06:55, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

October is correct. TYPO3 6.2 will be the next LTS version. In order to get a longer upgrading timeframe for users (and agencies as well), lifetime for 4.5 LTS has been extended by 6 months. Should the download page not yet reflect that, please open an issue in the t3o tracker so that a member with the appropriate rights can update the page. However, I personally don't see that as highest prio right now. Providing a timeframe on t3o which in fact is too short is not ideal, but it is not that bad either. If we instead gave a longer timeframe than there actually would be support, then this would be really bad. People might end up with insecure systems, probably having to pay additional upgrading fees etc. That would be even worse. --88.130.106.98 (talk) 02:14, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]