[development] LinksDB vs. Links
boris at bryght.com
Fri Jul 28 18:22:23 UTC 2006
On 28-Jul-06, at 9:05 AM, Jeff Eaton wrote:
> I'm not sure that's an accurate characterization. SysCrusher hasn't
> had a chance to work on the administrative screen for bulk link
> maint. work, but the module has been good to go under 4.7 for
> months now. It has a robust API, very solid views integration, and
> is easy to integrate with. The biggest problem is that 1) its
> description has an outdated warning, and 2) it hasn't been
> officially branched. That latter problem is definitely a big one,
> but I'd really suggest anyone considering implementing a links
> management system consider links.module and links.inc as their
> starting point.
> Obviously, some would prefer a smaller focused all in one
> solution. :) No problem with that. But the links package itself is
> definitely not in disrepair.
Would neglected be a better word? 1 & 2 as you mention above are
indicators to me that not enough attention is being paid to the
bundle (I'm not trying to diss links, just trying to find out more
about future direction / viability).
And yes, the other big thing is the does-it-all nature...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the development