[development] RFC: Candidate 'premium' modules

Dries Buytaert dries.buytaert at gmail.com
Tue May 16 08:02:14 UTC 2006

On 16 May 2006, at 03:26, James Walker wrote:
>> a) release-critical - A new version of Drupal cannot be released
>> unless these are up-to-date.
>> b) quality controlled - these will be 'core modules' in all but name.
>> c) well maintained - HEAD, current release and previous release  
>> should
>> all be maintained preferably by a number of maintainers.
> How do we keep track of which these are? Who decides? trackback,  
> e.g. is afaik currently unmaintained... etc.
> I do, however, think that somehow giving folks an idea of which  
> modules are worth trying before others is a good one. But this  
> sounds like a sticky situation at best... tread lightly.

We've discussed this a dozen times -- like most of the things we're  
talking about nowadays.  We'll use "usage patterns" to determine what  
the important modules are.  Automatically sorting modules by  
popularity is something we're working on.  Clearly, this will save us  
a lot of trouble.  ;)

Dries Buytaert  ::  http://www.buytaert.net/

More information about the development mailing list