> The web-development market is rapidly moving away from client side
> programs like Dreamweaver to database-driven, server-side
> content management systems like Drupal, Joomla, Plone and a host of
> others.
> The advantages would take too many pages to list here.

> For many CMS systems I've looked at, the biggest single disadvantage
> is being forced to create and maintain page content one fragment at a
> time,
> by typing into an insert or update form. Page fragment data has to end
> up
> inside a database schema at some point, but if inserts and updates
> happen because server-side code reads a static file system, then the
> programmer can use awk, sed, bash, perl or python to munge multiple
> files
> before clicking a database update button.

> (what if you used zip or tar or wget -r to suck down and entire
> website, so you could move it, and now you have various image urls,
> not releative paths, names or what ever else, embedded inside pages or
> fragments,
> that need to be changed now that the site has moved......the file
> system is an order of magnitude easier to manipulate than a database
> ....perl TreeBuilder, etc)

> Are there any content management systems that work that way?
> I'll bet there are. But I haven't it yet........CMS systems that use
> the file system as an intermediate step between keyboard and database
> table?