Noticed quite a few links in the logs coming from this article.

article no longer online

Its in German but I used google to tranlsate it, its a review of ASP.NET CMS solutions. mojoPortal, Cuyahoga and OmniPortal were all eliminated from the review because the author had difficulty with installation.

Its not a very elaborate test/comparison from what I can tell, no load testing or anything like that just one persons first reaction in terms of features and usability.

And no surprise DotNetNuke comes out on top. Its a shame to lose a comparison by not being compared. I have tried to make mojoPortal easy to install, I have helped a few people with installation in the forums but really not many problems reported in relation to the number of downloads. Is it fair to conclude from this article that mojoportal is hard to install or could it be that the author didn't put in much effort and didn't follow the instructions? Maybe a little of both?

What do you think? Is mojoPortal dificult to install and if so what could we do to make it easier? As a developer and thinking that the target audience is mostly developers I've always preferred x-copy deployment but maybe for windows I should provide a Windows installer?

mojoPortal, got a nice write up on the CMS Report web site today.

Big Thanks go out to Bryan Ruby for giving us some coverage!

Anything that helps get the word out is a big help to the project.

3 Nice mojoPortal sites came online in the last few days.

http://www.freedive.nl/

http://blackerbygroup.com/

http://timberjax.com/

We're starting to get an interesting variety of sites on our mojo Sites page.

If you've got a mojoPortal site out there we'd be glad to link to you

In the coming 2.1.1/1.0.4 release (this month) it will be possible to run mojoPortal in Medium Trust environments.

I started some new documentation about configuring mojoPortal for Medium trust here:

http://www.mojoportal.com/mediumtrust.aspx

Significant progress was made this week in converting to the new 2.0 .NET localization model in svn branches/2.1.1 so we will probably be able to make a new release in about 2 weeks. I still have some tweaking and testing to do and also still need to implement the keyboard shortcuts feature that is targeted for the 2.1.1 release.

The Culture*.config files will go away with this release and culture specific strings will come from App_GloabalResources/Resource*.resx files where the default english will be just Resource.resx, Russian will be Resource-ru.resx, and Mexican spanish will be Resource-es-MX.resx for example.

In the new model, the culture of the browser is detected and if there is a resource file for that culture it will be used, otherwise it will fall back to the default cutlure specified in the web.config. We will still use the /Data/MessageTemplate/*.config files which also have fallback to the default culture.

The new .resx file format is in a very readable xml format and can be edited with a text editor, though VS 2005 has a nicer built in editor. Going forward, anyone contributing translations should contribute them in .resx format plus message tamplate files.

Since the 2.1 release shipped last weekend, the new development branch in svn is branches/2.1.1 and changes will only be made in branches/2.1 if we have to make important bug fixes before the next planned release.

Of course content from the database is always in the language that it was entered in but labels, buttons, date formats etc will adapt to the user's browser. Hopefully I will update this site later this week from svn.