Has anyone had any experience private-labeling Umbraco? Specifically this would be skinning of the backend I assume; we would be targeting the content entry users (I'm imagining limited to accessing the Content and Media sections).
Does anyone have any comments on level of effort? (I'm assuming it is possible due to the open source nature of Umbraco, but didn't know how 'ready' the code base is for such a feat).
Has anyone from Umbraco's professional services encountered or implemented a similar client request?
Ok, after having to work through this, I have a little experience to share.
After more talks with the manager, he was fine with the removal of "Umbraco" from the interfaces, and wasn't as much concerned about it being completely undetectable, just not broadcasted as loudly. My personal requirement was to not have to do a custom build -- for the project that would take more time than I had allocated for it and was not an option for me as a developer.
I was able to find most places the brand is presented, and either mostly commented out uneccessary code or renamed it to the trade name my manager gave me. I disabled the search/Examine stuff, so I didn't need to mess with any of the search results/indexing/etc that was involved.
I renamed the ~/umbraco and ~/umbraco_client directories, finding all the references to them and knowing I had updated them all was the only tricky part with that. I also renamed the ~/umbraco/umbraco.aspx page, but it ends up this is a common landing page for backoffice stuff and is hard coded many places. I ended up creating a response.redirect page, named umbraco.aspx, and transfering to the new-named page.
If you rename the ~/umbraco directory, most package installations will fail (specifically ones that add backoffice usercontrols), as part of the package instructions are to copy the files to "~/umbraco/blah." I was not relying on many packages (and once the package files were in their correct new places, everything worked fine), so manually copying the files worked fine.
Thanks for asking. Though I'm personally not opposed to sharing, as this is a publically available forum and visible and searchable to the world, I'd perfer not to go into detail, beyond 'my manager asked me to.'
Thanks though. Matthew
PS Thanks, Daniel, for the heads up on that project.
Customers ask for Umbraco these days so why make it a private labeled cms? I can only see commercial benefits. But the intersting part is that private labeling Umbraco creates an update nightmare since you have done a lot of hacking. I'm really intersted how you upgrade sites and the time it takes to upgrade a site?
Private Label Umbraco?
Hi,
Has anyone had any experience private-labeling Umbraco? Specifically this would be skinning of the backend I assume; we would be targeting the content entry users (I'm imagining limited to accessing the Content and Media sections).
Does anyone have any comments on level of effort? (I'm assuming it is possible due to the open source nature of Umbraco, but didn't know how 'ready' the code base is for such a feat).
Has anyone from Umbraco's professional services encountered or implemented a similar client request?
Thanks,
Matthew
Ok, after having to work through this, I have a little experience to share.
After more talks with the manager, he was fine with the removal of "Umbraco" from the interfaces, and wasn't as much concerned about it being completely undetectable, just not broadcasted as loudly. My personal requirement was to not have to do a custom build -- for the project that would take more time than I had allocated for it and was not an option for me as a developer.
I was able to find most places the brand is presented, and either mostly commented out uneccessary code or renamed it to the trade name my manager gave me. I disabled the search/Examine stuff, so I didn't need to mess with any of the search results/indexing/etc that was involved.
I renamed the ~/umbraco and ~/umbraco_client directories, finding all the references to them and knowing I had updated them all was the only tricky part with that. I also renamed the ~/umbraco/umbraco.aspx page, but it ends up this is a common landing page for backoffice stuff and is hard coded many places. I ended up creating a response.redirect page, named umbraco.aspx, and transfering to the new-named page.
If you rename the ~/umbraco directory, most package installations will fail (specifically ones that add backoffice usercontrols), as part of the package instructions are to copy the files to "~/umbraco/blah." I was not relying on many packages (and once the package files were in their correct new places, everything worked fine), so manually copying the files worked fine.
Matthew
Just out of interest, how come you wanted to remove the Umbraco branding? Was the client against it?
I've done skinning of the backoffice using jquery..
Check out the BackOffice Themes package
Hi alimac,
Thanks for asking. Though I'm personally not opposed to sharing, as this is a publically available forum and visible and searchable to the world, I'd perfer not to go into detail, beyond 'my manager asked me to.'
Thanks though. Matthew
PS Thanks, Daniel, for the heads up on that project.
+1 for alimac,
Customers ask for Umbraco these days so why make it a private labeled cms? I can only see commercial benefits. But the intersting part is that private labeling Umbraco creates an update nightmare since you have done a lot of hacking. I'm really intersted how you upgrade sites and the time it takes to upgrade a site?
Cheers,
Richard
We know upgrading won't be a problem if the "The Upgrade Myth" is true ;).
Jeroen
is working on a reply...