On Sat, 19 Aug 2006, [iso-8859-1] Bèr Kessels wrote:
around a project. Someone who looks "For a CMS that allows blogging and an image gallery" does not sense that, and wll probably need to go trough the whole range of "shazamgallery (not-user-safe)", "gallery2 (glues gallery2 to Drupal)", "img assist (not for image galleries)", "acidfree (for a very specific task, not very flexible)" and the rest to find out what he /realy/ needs, "image module". If we can show such a person that "image" is the one to go for right away, that would be great. But right now, getting that knowledge requires a lot of effort for people new to Drupal.
The broad range of "image gallery" type modules show that "image gallery" means different things to different people. The fact that *you* have found image.module to work for your need best does mean that it is the golden one? What if you have slightly different needs? Golden or not golden is a binary thing. If something is golden, it does not mean it fulfills my needs. Quality is just one factor, and we should certainly not treat it as binary. Gabor