eZ publish Evaluation: Version 2 Vs. Version 3

Stability

For the purposes of this evaluation, ‘stability’ is defined as the number of bugs reported over a fixed period of time. This basically means: the smaller the number of bugs, the more stable the system is considered. Obviously, this working definition can be said to measure other things besides ‘stability’, such as the commitment or involvement of the user community to one particular version, or the degree to which the available functionality matches the users’ expectations or requirements.

In any case, it is safe to say that a system with a large number of reported bugs will require more maintenance than one with fewer reported bugs. If an organization does not have the resources to monitor developments and perform all the required updates, an advanced system may soon develop into a slow, unreliable, error-ridden and potentially insecure Website.

Overviews of the eZ publish bugs can be found here and here. Table 2 below lists the numbers of bugs reported during the period 26 March to 26 May 2003, categorized as follows: database, user interface, generic logic problems, permissions, hangs and crashes, and other. Bugs that presented security problems are also listed.

Table 2. Comparison of eZ publish versions 2 and 3: numbers of bugs in each category reported during the period 26 March to 26 May 2003

Conclusion

eZ publish 2 is an application that requires relatively little maintenance. The system is well-tested, stable and apparently secure. An organization opting for an eZ publish 2 application with fairly limited customization would be relatively independent from external developers.

Although eZ publish 3 has an advantage over version 2 in that it expands the possibilities for the creation of customized content within the system, it is still a high-maintenance application. Though the core functionality of version 3 is much more stable than version 2, the number of bugs in version 3 is still considerable. Vigilance on the part of the internal IT team or the external developers is constantly required, at least to ensure that all potential (security) problems are resolved. However, a systematic approach with regard to the handling of bugs might be beyond the scope of organizations with limited resources.

The Results

In general, we’d advise any organization to be realistic and use common sense when developing an Internet strategy. The organization should take into account its current requirements and future plans for a Website, the availability of resources (budget, staff, developers, support), and possible time constraints. For example, do the functional requirements demand the use of the latest, cutting-edge Web-based technology, or does the organization simply need something to ‘jump start’ an Internet project, while keeping other options open?

eZ publish 2 is an ideal solution for an organization with limited resources and time, which requires a low-maintenance, user-friendly application with extensive ‘out-of-the-box’ functionality. The server requirements for running version 2 are relatively modest, and enable the organization to opt for a cheap hosting solution. eZ publish 2 has a comprehensive set of functional modules that require little modification to meet the demands of most small to medium-sized organizations.

The back-end is user-friendly and easy to understand, even for novices with no Web publishing experience. Changing the look and feel of the front end is relatively simple, and does not require extensive knowledge of the eZ publish application. Due to its flexible, modular set up, version 2 allows advanced customization to meet the needs of the organization, but this might come at the cost of dependence on an external service provider and problems with the install of (security) updates or modifications by third parties.

eZ publish 3 is ideally suited to organizations whose functional requirements go beyond what is provided in the ‘standard’ modules of version 2, or that have ambitious plans for future site development. eZ publish 3 is more flexible than version 2, and allows for extensive customization while avoiding dependency on a single external service provider. On the downside, the development of a Website based on eZ publish 3 will require more from an organization (or external service provider) in terms of involvement in the development cycle, project planning skills, application maintenance and training of Web designers/developers and content managers than would a site based on version 2.

Because version 3 is more flexible, it has a steeper learning curve than in version 2. This disadvantage is offset by the quality of the available manuals and community-contributed documentation. The performance level of eZ Publish 3 is acceptable, and is likely to improve in the near future, but the use of PHP caching applications could put some restrictions on the choice of hosting accounts.