Google Sites transition
September 3, 2020 8:24 AM Subscribe
A group I used to volunteer for has a Google Sites website that will be forcibly converted to the new (awful) sites format in November. As the former web guy, they are asking me how to transition from Sites to another CMS. My CMS is a text editor. That's not going to work for them. Suggestions? tl;dr inside.
Organization is a Cub Scout Pack. My son aged out and is now in a BSA Troop, so I am tangentially involved in the Pack but trying to hand over my plethora of old duties to people who actually still have kids in the unit.
The site is a relatively straightforward 2 column layout, with a header and footer. It seems to be a template someone paid for ages ago. During my 6 years in the unit I rebuilt a lot of page content but didn't do anything to the template. When Google rolled out their new Sites templates I tried to convert the page - it was an atrocious mess. Design and layout options were incredibly limited, the site ended up unusable and I managed to change it back. At this point Google is forcing the transition, no option but to accept it or move elsewhere.
While content is currently hosted by Google Sites, the Pack pays for their own domain name. I've already suggested they transfer this to Dreamhost, which I've used for years, and roll in hosting services in the process to keep it a single bill.
Basically any CMS is plug-and-play for Dreamhost, but I have zero experience with any of the CMS options and am looking for recommendations for one that will be as easy as Sites for the new people to manage, and ideally one that makes importing the old content as easy as possible (e.g. open source editor, copy-paste main content code, adjust links as needed and done). They will not need any of the Google plugin bits such as page widgets, news feed, etc. -the only thing they may wish to retain is the calendar feed, but that should be easy to integrate.
Especially in these fun fun pandemic times, I don't want to recommend a CMS that will result in someone having to spend hours to totally redesign and rebuild the entire page. While I know the guy taking lead on this NOW is comfortable with code rather than a WYSIWYG system, his kids will eventually age out of the program as well. If HIS future replacement is not HTML-savvy, then we're just punting the responsibility forward a few years, which is not fair.
Organization is a Cub Scout Pack. My son aged out and is now in a BSA Troop, so I am tangentially involved in the Pack but trying to hand over my plethora of old duties to people who actually still have kids in the unit.
The site is a relatively straightforward 2 column layout, with a header and footer. It seems to be a template someone paid for ages ago. During my 6 years in the unit I rebuilt a lot of page content but didn't do anything to the template. When Google rolled out their new Sites templates I tried to convert the page - it was an atrocious mess. Design and layout options were incredibly limited, the site ended up unusable and I managed to change it back. At this point Google is forcing the transition, no option but to accept it or move elsewhere.
While content is currently hosted by Google Sites, the Pack pays for their own domain name. I've already suggested they transfer this to Dreamhost, which I've used for years, and roll in hosting services in the process to keep it a single bill.
Basically any CMS is plug-and-play for Dreamhost, but I have zero experience with any of the CMS options and am looking for recommendations for one that will be as easy as Sites for the new people to manage, and ideally one that makes importing the old content as easy as possible (e.g. open source editor, copy-paste main content code, adjust links as needed and done). They will not need any of the Google plugin bits such as page widgets, news feed, etc. -the only thing they may wish to retain is the calendar feed, but that should be easy to integrate.
Especially in these fun fun pandemic times, I don't want to recommend a CMS that will result in someone having to spend hours to totally redesign and rebuild the entire page. While I know the guy taking lead on this NOW is comfortable with code rather than a WYSIWYG system, his kids will eventually age out of the program as well. If HIS future replacement is not HTML-savvy, then we're just punting the responsibility forward a few years, which is not fair.
Best answer: If this is a site that is likely to change hands at intervals of a couple of years, I'd also suggest WordPress.
posted by pipeski at 9:18 AM on September 3, 2020 [1 favorite]
posted by pipeski at 9:18 AM on September 3, 2020 [1 favorite]
Best answer: Umpteenthing WordPress, especially if you want something reasonably user-friendly for non-web-devs.
~At this point Google is forcing the transition, no option but to accept it or move elsewhere.
If you do move the site away from Google Sites, I would quadruple-check that you can, in fact, fully delete the Google Sites version. Just sayin'. Even though the domain will be moved elsewhere, you really don't want the old GoogleSites version hanging around and popping up in Google searches or whatnot. Or, alternately, you can leave the GS site up, but make it a landing page with just the new URL and clickable redirect.
posted by Thorzdad at 11:24 AM on September 3, 2020 [1 favorite]
~At this point Google is forcing the transition, no option but to accept it or move elsewhere.
If you do move the site away from Google Sites, I would quadruple-check that you can, in fact, fully delete the Google Sites version. Just sayin'. Even though the domain will be moved elsewhere, you really don't want the old GoogleSites version hanging around and popping up in Google searches or whatnot. Or, alternately, you can leave the GS site up, but make it a landing page with just the new URL and clickable redirect.
posted by Thorzdad at 11:24 AM on September 3, 2020 [1 favorite]
WordPress is very popular but is also heavily targetted by bad actors, if you fall behind in keeping it updated it will get hacked. What some people do is build the website in WordPress and then convert it to static HTML.
posted by Lanark at 1:13 PM on September 3, 2020
posted by Lanark at 1:13 PM on September 3, 2020
I'd put them on the cheapest plan at wordpress.com ($48/year) that allows you to use your own domain. That way they won't need to worry about updating plugins or other security issues.
posted by belladonna at 1:54 PM on September 3, 2020 [4 favorites]
posted by belladonna at 1:54 PM on September 3, 2020 [4 favorites]
2nd belladonna
I'm using their second tier paid account and I love it.
I'm actually working on a new site for my boss using wordpress.com.
I've used wordpress.com for probably 15 years. I had a self hosted wordpress site once, and I'll never do it again.
posted by kathrynm at 3:48 PM on September 3, 2020 [1 favorite]
I'm using their second tier paid account and I love it.
I'm actually working on a new site for my boss using wordpress.com.
I've used wordpress.com for probably 15 years. I had a self hosted wordpress site once, and I'll never do it again.
posted by kathrynm at 3:48 PM on September 3, 2020 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: Thanks everyone! I’ll pass the word to the group...
posted by caution live frogs at 7:22 AM on September 6, 2020
posted by caution live frogs at 7:22 AM on September 6, 2020
« Older Integrating cats in a non miserable fashion | Does anyone remember this vintage blog about... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by figurant at 8:38 AM on September 3, 2020 [2 favorites]