[consulting] Feasibility

[Sheryl]

Sam Tresler wrote:

> To continue your analogy, yes, a hammer is a tool. It is a simple tool. 
> Drupal is an entire construction site, with cranes, backhoes, welders, 
> and cement trucks. I wouldn't send an inexperienced client in there 
> without a hardhat and a representative OSHA presence.

A few years ago I set up a drupal instance on the job.  It was the first
drupal instance at the site, the first drupal experience for the developer
who was going to work on it.  I wrote a little authentication module and 
some proof of concept work and otherwise supported the developer as he got 
started.

My then-boss, a very talented programmer and sysadmin, installed drupal
at home.  He came to me and asked if he was missing something, because
he had expected more to be there out of the box.  The way I characterized
drupal was as a huge pile of lumber -- you can build anything with it, but
it's up to you to build it.  So I'm smiling in recognition as I see the
construction analogies on this thread.

> Am I incorrect in thinking crappily built sites are endemic to Drupal? 
> Is this just the learning curve, or some broader issue that gives 
> clients and vendors the impression that Drupal is a drop-in or 
> set-it-and-forget-it solution?

I'm seeing a lot of drupal-only or drupal-focused shops out there that
write their own extensions and so forth.  The "first effort" I mentioned
above was pronounced a failure and shelved after many months of work by the
developer.  Drupal was not a good fit for the application, it was chosen
mostly because the developer wanted experience with it.  But also, the old
"build the first one to throw away" principle applied.  A second effort
might have been better.  But I also know web designers who aren't really
programmers who like it for their projects.  So YMMV depending upon how
complex the site has to be.

Sheryl