On the theming subject could there be some middle ground here. First we have a default theme file for the module you can through all your one line theme functions in here. Then we allow for individual files that can provide seperation for more complicated and elaborate themeing. There might be a name spacing issue but there might be some way we could allow the individual files to overide the default functions which would allow some flexibility for people themeing functions and keeping up to date with bug fixes etc.
<br><br>Just my 2 cents.<br>James<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 5/6/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Adrian Rossouw</b> <<a href="mailto:adrian@bryght.com">adrian@bryght.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>On 06 May 2006, at 5:31 AM, Khalid B wrote:<br>> Count me in with Morbus, Earl, et al camp who are concerned by the<br>> number of files that will have to be included. A site with 15<br>> extra modules<br>> each with 3 theme_function will have 45 more files to include. If
<br>> we have<br>> just one file per module, then it is only 15. A world of difference.<br><br>One theme file per module has exactly NO benefits to designers over<br>having them in the .module to begin with.<br>If we find that having them in individual files is too slow (which I
<br>don't believe will be the case, but is something<br>we have to benchmark, not go either way on just because of a gut<br>feeling!) we can develop a caching layer<br>to handle this.<br><br><br>--<br>Adrian Rossouw<br>Drupal developer and Bryght Guy
<br><a href="http://drupal.org">http://drupal.org</a> | <a href="http://bryght.com">http://bryght.com</a><br><br><br></blockquote></div><br>