Case Study
View Case StudyTray.ai
Migrating hundreds of thousands of pages, re-platforming and extending for the leading composable AI integration platform
From Magnolia to BaseHub
We are the Magnolia to BaseHub migration experts
Last verified:
Challenges with Magnolia
Key pain points
Magnolia is the definition of “enterprise for the sake of enterprise.” The setup is heavy, the learning curve is brutal, and unless you have a Java team lying around, good luck getting anything done without burning through budget. The proprietary modules lock you in fast, integrations feel like a maze, and the admin interface slows to a crawl once you start dealing with real content volume. The pricing is expensive, opaque, and somehow still manages to feel bad value. If you're not a Fortune 500 with a tolerance for pain, it’s a project risk.
And honestly, who even uses Java anymore?
Steep Java learning curve
Magnolia expects your team to be fluent in Java and its ecosystem, which slows onboarding and makes even simple tasks feel heavier than they should.
Resource-intensive setup
It demands serious infrastructure and long setup cycles, which immediately rules it out for teams that expect fast iteration or modern DevOps workflows.
Vendor lock-in concerns
Once you're in, you're in. Magnolia’s proprietary modules make moving away painful, expensive, and often not worth the engineering time.
Complex third-party integration
Connecting Magnolia with modern tools and APIs isn’t straightforward, usually requiring custom Java work instead of simple plug-and-play integrations.
Native subscription support
Licensing is firmly enterprise-tier, with opaque pricing and steep annual fees that can balloon quickly, a bad fit unless you're Fortune 500.
Proprietary module reliance
Key features live behind Magnolia’s own tightly controlled modules, limiting flexibility and forcing teams to work the “Magnolia way” instead of choosing best-in-class tools.
Benefits of BaseHub
Key advantages
BaseHub CMS is generating buzz among developers for its fast, collaborative, and AI-powered environment. We really like the Notion style editor. Feels great to drop a / and you type in what you want. E.g heading, or bullet points etc.
It's pretty good for creating and organizing content. Even for teams that are new to CMS platforms. Features like easy nested repeater fields, real-time branching for team workflows, and seamless GraphQL integration impress both solo makers and growing agencies. The platform’s Typesafe approach and AI-assisted writing tools help speed up the publishing process, while modern UI design keeps the learning curve gentle for newcomers.
If you can handle the initial information overload when you first spin up an environment it's an incredible tool for collaboration and rapid site scaffolding.
They also have a pretty good freemium pricing model (nodody has as good as Sanity) and strong documentation help projects get off the ground quickly, especially for Next.js and React use cases. Frequent updates and community engagement is high, and the core team that built it, are from a really nice design focused agency. So can't knock it that much.
Intuitive Notion-style editor
If you can use Notion, you can get content into BaseHub without begging a developer for help. It is light, fast and easy to navigate
Effortless nested repeater fields
You can nest and stack content structures. It’s one of the few tools where complex schemas don’t instantly become a crime scene.
Real-time content branching
Branching lets teams experiment, test ideas, and push updates without breaking production. Preview changes instantly, merge when ready, panic never.
Ready-to-use GraphQL integration
BaseHub ships with clean, auto-generated GraphQL APIs, so developers don’t waste hours wiring resolvers or schema stitching. Query, fetch, and ship.
Typesafe SDK support
You get fully typed responses out of the box, which means fewer runtime surprises and a smoother dev experience. Your IDE becomes your safety net.
Collaborative team workflows
Teams can work together without stepping on each other’s toes, with clean approval flows and role-based editing. It’s built for fast-moving content teams.
Common questions
Magnolia to BaseHub migration FAQs
Answers to the most common questions about Magnolia to BaseHub migration
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.
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.
Get in touch
Fill out the form below and we'll get back to you
