Case Study
View Case StudyTray.ai
Migrating hundreds of thousands of pages, re-platforming and extending for the leading composable AI integration platform
From BaseHub to Tina CMS
We are the BaseHub to Tina CMS 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 Tina CMS
Key advantages
Tina CMS has a genuinely compelling core idea: real-time visual editing backed by Git. Instead of your content living in some opaque database, every change becomes a Git commit. For developer teams that already live in Git, this feels natural. The local development workflow is solid too — you can iterate on schema and content simultaneously, merge everything in a single commit, and keep your content pipeline tightly coupled with your codebase. That's a meaningful advantage over CMS platforms that treat content as a completely separate concern.
The inline editing experience is where Tina really shines. Content editors can see their changes in context on the actual live site, which dramatically reduces the feedback loop between "I changed something" and "here's what it looks like." For marketing teams and content creators who are tired of editing fields in a dashboard and then previewing on a separate URL, this is a breath of fresh air. It bridges the gap between developer-friendly and editor-friendly in a way that most headless CMS platforms don't even attempt.
Since going fully open-source under Apache 2.0 and being acquired by SSW, the self-hosting story has improved significantly. You can run your own backend with your own database and auth, which gives you more control than relying on TinaCloud. If you're building a Next.js or React-based project and want a CMS that lives close to your code, Tina is worth serious consideration. If you want help evaluating whether Tina fits your stack, or you're looking at alternatives, we're happy to chat.
Real-time visual editing
Editors can make changes directly on the live site with instant visual feedback. This is genuinely one of the best inline editing experiences in the headless CMS space.
Git-backed content workflow
Every content change becomes a Git commit, so your content versioning, branching, and collaboration all flow through the same tools your developers already use.
Schema defined in code
Content models are defined in your codebase alongside your components, keeping your content structure and frontend tightly aligned and version-controlled.
Strong local development experience
You can develop locally with full CMS functionality, iterate on schema and content together, and push everything in a single commit. No cloud dependency during development.
Markdown and MDX support
Tina works natively with markdown and MDX files, making it a natural fit for documentation sites, blogs, and any project that already uses file-based content.
Fully open-source and self-hostable
The entire backend is open-source under Apache 2.0. You can self-host with your own database, auth, and Git provider, giving you full control over your content infrastructure.
Common questions
BaseHub to Tina CMS migration FAQs
Answers to the most common questions about BaseHub to Tina CMS 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 do we migrate content out of Tina CMS?
Tina stores content as markdown and MDX files in your Git repository, which makes extraction the easiest part of any CMS migration we do. Your content is already files on disk. The work is in transforming those markdown files into the structured format your new CMS expects. Rich text blocks, custom components embedded in MDX, and frontmatter fields all need mapping. For a blog or docs site with 100 to 500 pages, we typically complete the migration in 2 to 4 weeks.
Why are teams leaving Tina CMS?
Three issues come up repeatedly. First, the React-only constraint for visual editing blocks teams that want to use Astro, SvelteKit, or other frameworks. Second, the development environment is unstable. The admin interface loads external assets that update independently of your codebase, so it can break without you changing anything. Third, the 2024 security breach involving compromised AWS keys shook confidence in the platform's operational maturity. Teams with enterprise compliance requirements found that hard to overlook.
Is it worth self-hosting Tina instead of migrating away?
Self-hosting removes the TinaCloud dependency, but it introduces its own gaps. There's no search functionality, no Git LFS support, and reference fields timeout on large collections. If you're already frustrated with Tina's instability, self-hosting adds more operational burden rather than solving the root problems. We've found that teams considering self-hosted Tina are usually better served by migrating to a platform with proper managed hosting and a more mature editorial experience.
Get in touch
Fill out the form below and we'll get back to you
