On Friday, April 5, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Roger wrote:
I'm curious that discussion comes back to how many modules areinstalled. Does this imply that significant commercial users are alsolocked in to a few core modules?We have only the modules we need, and some additional ones whichovercome inequities in other modules, like Nat needed to overcome aWorkbench-Taxonomy access problem that shouldn't exist in the first place.41 modules in all, most of which are base Drupal, like Views, Pathauto,token, etc. Users don't have choice on prerequisite modules so I am at aloss to understand the number of modules as a memory issue. I wouldmention though that a php dev working with us a while ago pointed outhow badly some modules are written.Modules, nothing more than plain text files, concatenate into ahomogeneous lump, they don't add much to the over all size of the Drupaloperating system, but how they handle and release memory is critical andif the number of modules assertion is true that "many modules makeDrupal collapse", then perhaps someone could look into moduleinteractions more closely.We are in 2013-4 era, with increasingly complex hardware andtechnologies, Should Drupal easily handle dozens even hundreds ofadditional modules?Sad part for us is that I have to set up the site to create newslettersand that means even more modules and possibly additional views. Is thisto mean that Drupal is about to have more problems?ThanksRoger--[ Drupal support list | http://lists.drupal.org/ ]