[development] RFC: Candidate 'premium' modules

[Gerhard Killesreiter]

Dries Buytaert wrote:
>
> 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.  ;)

This should be relatively easy now that we have dedicated downloads 
stats or modules.

Currently, the chart is as follows:

tinymce-4.7.0.tar.gz    3052
image-4.7.0.tar.gz    2958
img_assist-4.7.0    1633
event-4.7.0    1575
meta-4.7.0    1572
friendselectric-4.7.0    1565
gallery-4.7.0    1480
drupal-4.6.6    1450
acidfree-4.7.0    1436
antique_modern-4.7.0    1308
niftyCorners-4.7.0    1195
de-4.7.0    1143
category-4.7.0    1101
phptemplate-cvs    1091
front-4.7.0    1048
fancy-4.7.0    1037
print-4.7.0    999
box_grey-4.7.0    972
cck-4.7.0    966
controlpanel-4.7.0    958
adsense-4.7.0    927

For comparison:

drupal-4.7.0    25851

Three conclusions: 4.6 isn't all that popular anymore (or rather: people 
who have it won't need to download it anymore, new people chose 4.7). 
Niftyness/graphical stuff is high on the agenda, and: Why are there so 
few German developers when the de translation is so popular?

Cheers,
    Gerhard