I can only say that I agreed heartily to this response: As If Productions schrieb:
Ditto. In fact I appreciate it. It's finding the one you need that is the problem. The way I see it, this problem requires a taxonomical/navigational solution, not a paradigm shift in methodology. It would have to be an ongoing task/project in its own right, but IMHO it's one that could easily be supported by less-than-hardcore developers.
LVX TF
I apologize for shamelessly promoting my one proposal over the mailinglist, but actually, I believe that use-cases (see my proposal at http://drupal.org/node/397280 ) could - together with a nice searching solution - solve this problem. Why? Because use-cases would present a "you want this, you need that"-way of viewing modules, not some "I give you xyz" like modules do. And use-cases could be moderated/developed by "use-case-developers" not "module-developers". Why is this an advantage? A use-case-developer would need to think more like a designer then like a developer. And every developer likes *his* way of developing (for sometimes very good reasons). The result is, that we have multiple modules solving the same problem (in different ways). Thats wonderful! It's allows for evolution of modules (evolution never works with just one set, you need multiplicity). Nevertheless: Use-cases could select *one* of those modules/combinations and promote it. When (someday) another module is better, use-cases could change. Perhaps there are multiple use-cases solving a given problem. So what? As long as they present nice "what you get"/"when to choose this use-case" its still easier to decide.. -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards / Saludos cordiales *Sebastian Nerz* ___________________________________________ *Orestes* Eduard-Spranger-Str. 56 D-72076 Tuebingen - Deutschland Of. : +49-7071-56519-30 - Fax : +49-7071-56519-31 www.orestes-sol.com <http://www.orestes-sol.com/> s.nerz@orestes-sol.com <mailto:s.nerz@orestes-sol.com> ___________________________________________