[development] RFC: Candidate 'premium' modules
Gerhard Killesreiter
gerhard at killesreiter.de
Mon May 15 12:02:41 UTC 2006
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
More information about the development
mailing list