Git-based CMS Testing

Important

Disclaimer: This evaluation is based on personal experience and testing. Individual results may vary based on specific project requirements and technical expertise.

Legend:

Rating	Meaning
❌	Fail
😐	Pass
✅	Good
⭐	Great

Criteria:

• Ease of Development
  • Setup
  • Custom Renderers
  • Custom Components
  • Admin UI Customization
• CMS User Experience
  • Editing
  • Previewing

Keystatic

Criteria	Rating	Score	Note
Ease of Development	😐	7/10	Clunky setup, but good docs.
Setup	😐	7/10	Clunky, no clear custom renderer docs.
Custom Renderers	✅	8/10	Easy to add and use with common typography.
Custom Components	😐	6/10	Can add most things, but multi-layered components pose issues.
Admin UI Customization	😐	6/10	Can customize collection listing and logo.
User Experience	✅	8/10	Easy to use admin editor, might require some dev knowledge due to branch management.
Editing	✅	8/10	Good experience, but had some issues.
Previewing	✅	8/10	No WYSIWYG, but has a live preview.

Keystatic MDX (Experimental)

Warning

Experimental - no docs but seems to work well! (TODO: merge into repo)

TinaCMS + Docusaurus

Note

@brookjeynes investigated. Was easy to implement (TODO: merge into repo)

TinaCMS

Criteria	Rating	Score	Note
Ease of Development	✅	8/10	Clunky setup, but good docs.
Setup	😐	7/10	Clunky setup, but well-documented.
Custom Renderers	✅	8/10	Easy to add and use with common typography.
Custom Components	✅	8/10	Easy to add custom components.
Admin UI Customization	⭐	9/10	While I couldn't customize the logo. The actual customization of fields, validation is great
User Experience	✅	8/10	Easy admin editor, might require some dev knowledge due to branch management.
Editing	⭐	9/10	Excellent editing experience.
Previewing	⭐	10/10	Great live viewing/previewing experience.