[consulting] CMS comparison

[Darrel O'Pry]

On Wed, 2006-05-10 at 19:04 -0400, Jenny Hsueh wrote:
> sorry if my attached message was read in somewhat  negative tone and 
> saying drupal has to be a certain way.
> Quite opposite, what I'm saying is - if drupal is intended to be a 
> creative environment and taking less commercial interests then let it be 
> and we as people who are providing drupal as a service will then have to 
> plan accordingly and put the appropriate business wrappers around it, 
> this was never clear to me before.

I don't think Drupal is 'intended' to be anything. Its a tool for me. I
write code to make it fit my business and ideological needs. Its a
vehicle that saves me many hours of work and provides alot of the tools
I need/want.

> Also, software stability certainly does not mean less creativity or 
> freezing the features. It is more about a stable overall architecture, 
> re-using existing patterns and recognizing the new. I have just started 
> observing  the development list a few weeks ago, can't say I understand 
> all what have been said but my nose tells me drupal still has some way 
> to go to reach that level of maturity. This is all part of the growing 
> process, so it is not a complain but to point out the areas that need 
> some attention and solution.

I don't think you will see Drupal find a stable overall architecture as
long as people are coming up with better ways to do things. It
integrates the best ideas that come along, and makes and effort to
leverage them. I think the only thing you can depend on from version to
version is a data upgrade path. That's my limited understanding.

.darrel.