Case study
View case studyJamb
We rebuilt Jamb on Sanity and Next.js, merging two legacy PHP sites into one calm catalogue without losing the SEO equity their antique and reproduction collections had built up.
From BaseHub to Magnolia
We are the BaseHub to Magnolia migration experts
Last verified:
Challenges with BaseHub
Key pain points
BaseHub is one of those platforms that feels like it was built by a developer, for a developer, and at no point did anyone ask, “Won't marketers need to be able to edit on the go?” Once you’re inside, it’s tables inside tables inside tables, like a Russian doll but somehow less fun. And as we’ve said before, we genuinely appreciate good engineering… but BaseHub often feels like someone shipped the database schema and called it a CMS.
BaseHub is painful to use, in our opinion. Because the platform is still young, features sometimes glitch, real-time collaboration hiccups, and localization or migration workflows can get messy fast. Documentation gaps and unpredictable branching only add to the frustration. If you're determined to build on BaseHub, we can walk you through the safest path… or at least help you avoid the inevitable “why is this breaking again?” moments.
Occasional feature glitches
New features sometimes ship a bit wobbly, so expect the occasional “why is this suddenly broken?” moment.
Not yet enterprise-ready
It’s great for small teams, but big orgs will hit walls fast. Workflow maturity and stability just aren’t there yet.
Limited third-party integrations
If you rely on a rich ecosystem, BaseHub won’t meet you halfway. You’ll be wiring a lot of things yourself.
Localization support gaps
Multi-region content teams will feel the pain quickly as language handling still needs serious tightening.
API rate limiting constraints
Push it too hard and you’ll hit rate limits faster than you expect, which can block larger deployments.
Sporadic stability issues
Real-time collaboration and branching can hiccup under pressure, making scaling workflows frustrating.
Benefits of Magnolia
Key advantages
Magnolia shines if you’re the kind of organisation that genuinely needs the full DXP kitchen sink. It packs personalisation, workflows, multi-site orchestration, multilingual publishing, DAM, marketing automation hooks, and every enterprise acronym you can think of. If your teams run complex global content operations with strict governance, Magnolia’s mature permission system, stability, and long-standing enterprise reputation make it a safe, compliant option.
To be transparent, we don’t actually prefer or build with Magnolia (or any of the DXP-flavoured headless CMSs). They try to do everything, and like most jack-of-all-trades platforms, they don’t excel at the things modern teams actually need that is speed, flexibility, clean workflows, and sane pricing. We’d happily point you toward modern alternatives like Sanity that give you 10× the agility without the enterprise bloat.
Java-based enterprise integration
Built on Java, Magnolia plugs neatly into large enterprise stacks that already rely on Java systems and legacy infrastructure. If your organisation lives and breathes JVM, Magnolia won’t fight your architecture.
Secure, scalable architecture
Magnolia’s core is engineered for high-security, high-traffic environments, with strong access control, clustering, and enterprise-grade stability. It’s built to survive heavy editorial activity and large content delivery demands.
Real-time page templating
Editors can adjust components and layouts and immediately preview results, making large enterprise content operations faster and less error-prone.
Editable component previews
Magnolia’s component-level previewing gives editors clarity on how complex pages come together, reducing back-and-forth with developers and keeping multi-team workflows sane.
Multi-site management tools
Designed for global brands, Magnolia supports multiple sites, languages, and regional variations under one roof.
Advanced workflow automation
From multi-step approvals to compliance-driven publishing flows, Magnolia handles heavyweight governance. This is the stuff big enterprises actually need when 20 departments want access but only 2 should publish.
Common questions
BaseHub to Magnolia migration FAQs
Answers to the most common questions about BaseHub to Magnolia migration
How do we migrate content out of BaseHub?
BaseHub exposes content through its GraphQL API, so extraction means writing queries to pull your content tree and transforming the responses into your target CMS format. The nested repeater structure can make this tricky since deeply nested content needs to be flattened or re-mapped depending on where you're going. Media assets need to be downloaded and re-uploaded separately. For a typical project with moderate content volume, we budget 2 to 4 weeks for the full migration.
Why do teams leave BaseHub?
BaseHub is still a young platform, and teams hit its limits as projects grow. The most common complaints we hear are feature glitches in production, limited third-party integrations, and an interface that feels more like a database browser than a CMS. Localization support is weak, API rate limits bite harder than expected on high-traffic sites, and real-time collaboration can hiccup under pressure. Teams that need enterprise-grade reliability often outgrow BaseHub within 6 to 12 months.
Is BaseHub stable enough for production sites?
For small marketing sites and developer portfolios, BaseHub works fine. For anything with real traffic, multiple editors, or complex content workflows, we'd urge caution. The platform ships features quickly but stability doesn't always keep pace. We've seen branching break under pressure and collaboration features hiccup at inconvenient moments. If your business depends on publishing uptime, you want a CMS with a longer track record of production reliability.
How long does it take to migrate away from Magnolia CMS?
Magnolia migrations are among the most involved we handle. The Java-based architecture, proprietary modules, and tightly coupled workflows mean there's no quick extract-and-import path. Content needs to be exported from Magnolia's JCR (Java Content Repository), transformed, and loaded into your target platform. For a mid-sized enterprise site with 1,000 to 5,000 pages, expect 8 to 16 weeks. The timeline depends heavily on how many proprietary modules your team has adopted and how complex your multi-site setup is.
Why do companies leave Magnolia?
Cost and agility are the two main drivers. Magnolia's enterprise licensing is opaque and expensive, with annual fees that balloon as you add modules and environments. Teams also get frustrated by the Java dependency. Finding and retaining Java CMS developers is harder and more expensive every year, especially when modern headless platforms let teams build with JavaScript and TypeScript instead. The vendor lock-in from proprietary modules makes the decision feel overdue by the time teams finally commit to migrating.
Can we migrate from Magnolia to a headless CMS without losing our multi-site setup?
Yes, but the approach changes. Magnolia handles multi-site through its own orchestration layer, while headless platforms like Sanity use workspace configurations or project-level separation. We rebuild multi-site architectures using the target CMS's native multi-tenancy features. The content migration itself is the simpler part. The harder work is re-implementing your personalisation rules, approval workflows, and permission structures outside of Magnolia's proprietary ecosystem.
Get in touch
Tell us what you're building. We reply within one working day — Jono or someone on the team picks up every message personally.
