The Drupal Disadvantage in 4.7.3 Version

@thenicespider - a few of your points, such as the complaint about the WYSIWYG editor and the path_auto functionality, come down to the issue that there is a conscious effort to keep Drupal core slim and small. Not just in the size of the download (which is really irrelevant), but in terms of functionality. In fact, we're taking modules out of core faster than we're putting them in. The general consensus among the developers is that Drupal core should be a framework that provides basic services (user authentication, filter formats, menus, etc), and that every other specific feature should be in a contrib module. This is why there is no WYSIWYG editor in core and no path_auto.

At the same time, we're building the next release of Drupal in such a way that you can create install profiles. This will let people make distributions of Drupal core plus modules that serve specific purposes. This is where people like you can decide that a WYSIWYG editor and path_auto should be in every installation of Drupal and you can make an install profile that lets you have it that way, by default, when you install. This is a good solution because it saves Drupal core from having to have the answers for everybody's websites all the time.

- Robert Douglass

-----
My Drupal book: Building Online Communities with Drupal, phpBB and WordPress

The Xaneon guys who abandoned Mambo to go work with Drupal said very technical things about Mambo SEF URLs wrecking the site

And this Xaneon guys further elaborated that:
1. Drupal SEF URLs is superior

2. MULTI-SITE capabilities with just one click (I mean not click like Mambo noobs think)

3. MULTI-LANGUAGE - with i8n thingy and locale modules - superior

*And he said - poor Mambo, it is hard for a developer to develop `extensions' and if succesful, the cost is high and he/she has to charge people in order to recover the cost, and the time lost instead to earn a living

And the way Mambo development is messy and it infected Joomla development

And since when SEF URLs is default package with M/J - since a very recent time, and during that time, Drupalized sites have been hitting Google top pages easily

Drupal path alias has been available (path.module) since I think 4.6.3 and that hooked us newbies since then

It wasnt default Editor that we liked (we used Xoops with its own built-in editor but that was it)

*Google wise:

A URL using - instead of underscore _ is preferable to Google, am I correct, SEO experts aplenty here and they are impressed with Drupal SEO capabilities

*Dries - keep it lean and mean - no need to include Editors (bloating the basic package)

Noobs don't support the idea of a thin core... nor do they want to learn how to do it for themselves. They want everything handed to them on a silver platter and don't want to earn it.

Can Drupal maintain it's superior structure and scalability, and yet also be easy to use ... Well, lets think of this in term that everyone can understand.

Linux, Windows.

Nope... Not going to happen.

I disagree with that. Even from the start I preferred how Drupal was managed. It wasn't easy at first but Drupal tends to reward those who are willing to learn and have some patients. As you learn the system, you'll see how open ended it is. Definitely not for everyone, but the Drupal team is working to make things friendlier.

The "thin core" works because the API's are in place and it attracts developers. Throw all your friendly features into core then the next guy will want what they think are the real friendly features. Keep piling them in and everything gets bogged down.

Anything to help manage development I'm all in for. If you want everything out of a single download then go work with Joomla. -well, until the install profiles gain momentum.

–joon
http://www.dvessel.com

Your sensing unit needs work. Lots of work. I am tired of people immediatly implying that those they disagree with are arogant. Like that helps the conversation.

I responded to his points that I understood. It's nice that you have been involved in the computer industry for 30 years. Thank you for your implication that those contirbuting to Drupal are going out of their way to make things complicated. They are not. They do not. They publish api.drupal.org which is taken from the very source code you are using. They publish example code for people to use and learn from. They do this so that people can learn from and share their use of this stuff.

Stop saying or thinking that what Drupal does is simple. It's not. Putting together a system to safely and securely manage and display information, users, roles, display of information, work on Windows and *nix, IIS and Apache, MySQL and PostGRE is not simple. The tools required for flexibility are not simple tools. The concepts required to understand such are not simple. As complex as this is, I was able to get my first Drupal site installed on Windows IIS in less then a week with no previous CMS experience.

Your rhetorical question, "Can't we be both powerful and easy?" Here's an answer. If you have a focused specific purpose system where you can control and determine the parameters and environment it is used in, then you can simplify it at the cost of power and flexibility. If you want powerful then no, there will be some degree of complexity. This is why I could replace parts on my old 78 Chevy engine and cannot on my current 98 Dodge truck The newer more powerful one is just more complex.

How's this for you though.... after almost 3 years of using Drupal successfully for a variety of sites, I finally learned how to use a php if.. else statement. I, a NON-DEVELOPER, have been using Drupal for almost three years without php knowledge. Without much SQL knowledge. Successfully. For several sites.

Unlike virtually every other CMS out there, Drupal has no roots or relations to the Nuke series which formed the basis of so many others. Drupal from the ground up had a different goal and philosophy that caused it's evolution and development to be different. I have recently come to suspect that the biggest stumbling block to new people is that those roots are so different that peoples own assumptions from their previous experience gets in the way.

Drupal core is a foundation starting point. Out of the box, core can be a CMS. But it's not meant to be 'The CMS' or even your whole site. It's meant to be the starting point for you to develop and build your site to your tastes. That so many have found this to be true and contributed hundreds of modules to extend and enhance the base functionality is a testament to Drupal's flexibility.

When so many do not need something, why put it in? With core you start with a light weight system that you customize to your needs and desires. You do not have to include a link to Drupal.org (in fact if people can't tell you used Drupal as your base then so much the better). You do not need to have a GUI text editor but if you want, you can choose your favorite (TinyMCE, FCKeditor, HTMLArea).

You choose or write modules for YOUR site's needs. Which you use depends on if you are running a corporate brochure, a blog, an artists portfolio, a podcast, an interest forum or any combination of those. The components of core are meant as the base. Some are there for historical reasons, others are not there because that will limit the flexibility that is continually being built into core.

Drupal has a learning curve. Every complex system has a learning curve. Whether you find it suits your needs or not is entirely up to your goals.

By to limited, I was refering to the focus on the specific sites that would use such a feature. Previous mention/polling/discussion show that while some features valuable to one group are in no way useful to others. Drupal core runs in 8MB of php memory. That's an incredibly small amount. Some sites run in 16 MB, but it depends on their needs. Drupal is one of the few CMS that with careful selection of modules, you can run a modest site on modest hardware.

-Steven Peck
---------
Test site, always start with a test site.
_{Drupal Best Practices Guide -|- Black Mountain}

one tendency I see is that the truly talented programmers sometimes WANT their systems to be complex and obtuse. It's seen as a badge of honor to their abilities.

If you've seen this elsewhere I challenge you to find it here. I've not seen this attitude even once. What I see from reading the issue queues (you can read them too.... there's an issues link in the upper rh corner) is a constant quest for better code (no bugs, runs more efficiently), more features, more flexibility, easier to use, and better documentation. Seems like we all want the same thing. There are also not so many "artistic hobby" developers as you might think. Most of the developers who've responded here are full-time Drupal developers who earn their living making Drupal sites.

I also constantly ask myself, "why did they make such-and-such so difficult?"

A better question would be "how could this be easier while retaining the flexibility and power that is currently there?"

- Robert Douglass

-----
My Drupal book: Building Online Communities with Drupal, phpBB and WordPress

While reading the site's posts i found a mention that drupal is a "CMS kit"
That is, a CMS builder, maker or development kit.
I find this a very good quote to repeat whenever comparisons arise.

The core is only the engine and modules must do everything else.
I was previously using xoops and mambo and found drupal a far, far more advanced system.
My definition of module crashed at first, with cultural shock, but now modules for me equal functionality.
With an advanced system things are bound to be different.

Hopefully, with the advent of the installer scripts i expect to be seeing more distribution packages like civicspace.
These will include all that it is expected on a CMS and currently left to manual installation.
The editor, the preconfigurations, the installer and frequently used modules could be included.

Perhaps drupal.org should have a whole page of a handbook explaining the comparative advantages.
Something like a migration FAQ. That way no one would miss the goodies.

I can still see some points that could be hard to relearn from other CMSes to drupal:

1. Integration = Distribution. I suggest a FAQ file specially targeted for new drupal users.
2. Covered by modules.
3. Covered by the installer.
4. I can think of this as an useful helping tool for the person doing the install.
I suppose the install files already checks for the mysql version to use, done automatically.
I can see many posts of people not checking permissions and apache stuff before installation, despite being elemental steps.
Since the core can't cover these helpers, can the hooks and API let you develop those pages in a modular way?
As far as i checked the installer on CVS i think it can, making configuration pages and such things.
5. You mean javascript tabs? i can see that would be useful, i use those things a lot.
The jstools module has that covered, altough not made to place the node functions there.
The fieldset collapsible feature does the job and i like it better than to follow the tabs separately as in Mambo.
6. Is the mentioned difference for frontend and backend only to languages?
Someone just did an admin page revamp, but it's not in 4.7.3
There's also the control panel module to have icons.
When i used mambo found hard to navigate to the components and items.
In drupal i find the admin pages less cluttered and not grouped by content type.
However, these differences are merely for the pages organization.
Any customizations would not be in the core.
7. I think the i18n module covers language selection, altough not sure if this related.
That way the admins and staff could select its own language.
8. Covered by the category module. Takes a while to configure.
9. I guess there a module for gzipped uploads could be developed. That wouldn't be part of the core.
But more than for modules i'd like it for themes, because that way users could be promoted and demoted from a role instead of having to give ftp access every time.

Edit:
As for learning curves i didn't find it easy.
I picked up 240 modules to use on various sites, counting the core modules.
Not all of them are used at a time, but must keep track of all the updates and versions.
Fortunately, the update tracking improvements are already in the news.

I am strongly against including an EDITOR because the size of the basic Drupal package and `modules' will be big

Understand that some some organizations dont even afford a decent internet access, and USB Flash Drive to store the downloaded packages, and I know many still depend on cybercafes (public Internet access) to operate a portal / website

I have given diskettes for free for small organizations and webmasters which are less than 1300 KB (basic + additional modules)

And also, to make things easier, small size is easy to attach in emails. That saves them from having to visit Drupal.org to download - honestly, it is confusing for a non Drupal user

One of the reasons many stick to Drupal is because the basic installation is only around 1.8 MB, while other CMS like Xoops are 5 MB or more, and that doesnt include aditional modules, what more, it is very confusing to browse Xoops.org `module repository' for what functionality you want, either by name, by A-Z, or by searching

An included WYSIWYG editor would be serious code bloat

If drupal would come with one of the many many many options there will certainly be people who don't like our choice... so we would dissapoint probably just as many people as we are now by not including any.

Instead you have the choice to install one of the great options that are available like quicktags, TinyMCE, FCKeditor or htmlarea...

Or maybe you want to have filter like in most forums you might try filters like textile, bbcode or even pirate

--
I work for Ontwerpwerk

Knowledge and learning are key aspect of "ease of use" and many just arn't willing to put in the time to come to that part of the drupal journey.

Drupal itself isn't hard to use when you have it installed, and with the new installer that will not be difficult.

However its when your imagination takes over and you want more out of the basic distgribution than you currently have that you may run into issues and a learning curve. This is the same with everything. Macromedias Dreamweaver is easy to use but hard to master for instance, same can be said for Drupal.

Linux itself is far easier to install than it used to be, could be classed as "easy to use" out of the box until you wish to add to stock programs and get into the potentials of compiling etc.

At the end of the day there is no skipping over the knowledge you'll need to learn to use ANY system. PHPNUKE, Joomla, MAMBO, DRUPAL, and countless blog applications all have a learning curve and once mastered are all classed by the learnee's as easy.

Granted things can always be improved but if uploading a module to the modules directory and clicking a checkbox to get it activated is deemed hard then i'm sorry to say that i doubt an expandable CMS system is for you.

Also remember that out of the box you can install drupal and tap in content straight away, producing pages almost immediately.

Drupal is as easy as you make it or as hard as your imagination takes you. And regardless of ease of use an admin still needs to learn html, css, some basic javascript (at least as far as cutting and pasting), php and countless other techniques to make his site unique.

If this isn't what the admin wants to do, doesn't feel he can commit to learn and adapt and wants a standard (to his standards, which may differ from person to person) then maybe Drupal as a platform may not be for him. If he wants flexability, a system that will grow with his ideas, a very powerful development platform and a constantly evolving programe then he'll have to commit to learning some of its underbelly, its really as simple as that.

You might be confusing frustration with rudeness though

Rereading, I think you're right.

uninformed

Opinions on some of the subjects raised are more valid from the uninformed - once informed you don't need many of the suggestions made. Not understanding this is missing the point.

frustrating - especially when the person has no idea of how much effort is currently going on

The implication here is that because people are working hard nobody else can raise questions. That can't be right, can it?

They all seem to have this attitude that the Drupal developers (whatever that means) are deliberately trying to make things difficult, or at the very least don't care about making things easier

Groups of people do exactly that - without realising it they develop their own languages, accents and other means of communication, the aim and results of which is to exclude outsiders. To do the opposite - reach out beyond the 'in group', requires a continuous conscious effort.

Another thing they all seem to have is this idea that somehow a few of their special 'ideas' will spark this massive mobilisation of development effort to achieve them.

Of course not all ideas will start a mobilisation but all "mobilisations" start with an idea.

Drupal doesn't need more non contributing users

Depends what's wanted of Drupal. If you want Drupal to be 'bigger' and more popular it needs more users, if you don't, it doesn't. I want Drupal to be bigger and more popular to help it get better and create enough momentum for it to continue and continue to improve.

if someone wants their 'special idea' implemented they will either have to do it themselves or sponsor the work. If anyone wants to shape Drupal they need to become a contributor not a commentator.

That's fine if you want an in-group-serving club (a valid opinion that looks after football supporters, youth 'tribes', nationalism and religions). But if you want more than that - eg, a CMS that appeals to the outside world (both techies and no-techies) - then you need to do the opposite and listen to non-coders, non-writers, non-donors and non-testers.

thenicespider was offering to be a contributor. Personally, I commission and submit modules and I'm writing guidelines for those who want to SEO with Drupal. But this doesn't make our opinions better than if we were just commentators.

This thread got sadder the more I read.

I thought the Drupal dev-community was a tad more grown-up than some of the other bitchy dev communities I frequent... Luckily, I still cling onto the belief that not everyone here feels the need to bare arms at the mere whisper of a "competitor", or the sight of a "stranger", AKA: a new user.

... sheesh!

Desmon:
Macromedias Dreamweaver is easy to use but hard to master for instance, same can be said for Drupal.

Yet it's one of the most successful website packages out there. So why do people use it? Because it has a comprehensive help manual (one of the best IMO).

... which shows that you can have complex apps that people will use if the help system is there.

I often read about the documentation system here being improved - which is great - but that only covers Drupal ass. Far worse are some of the modules - Some of them have a one-line statement and that's it!! It's like the author is thinkin, "Oh they'll know what it is and how it works!"

Same with commented code (if any!).

If Drupal confines itself to core activities, then it will be the modules that undermine it if quality doesn't at least meet a minimum benchmark which addresses the "whole" experience of using a particular module.

Yes, documentation is a pain in the arse but if you release sommat to the public, presumably you want it to be used.

(Even (at least) one of the Summer of Code's finished entries I tried out earlier had a total lack of documentation and even failed to specify the need for an external component... I find that quite amazing TBH but put it down (I hope) to time-constraint and hope it will be put right soon. It deserves to be put right 'cos it's an amazing piece of work, but again, what is the point if no one can use it?)

DESMON:
Also remember that out of the box you can install drupal and tap in content straight away, producing pages almost immediately.

I note you guarded that statement with the word, 'almost' ;) But the thrust of it does suggest that you "expect" people to know HTML to qualify using a CMS... which is wrong unless you only allow Drupal to be used by geeks, pure and simple.

This is all reminding me of products that were ground-breaking and brilliant, but quickly superceded by imitators who understood KISS and the user. Personally, whether Drupal has a WYSIWYG or not won't stop me using it - It would surely make my life a lot easier however, and yes, it defo should have one as part of the install. Afterall, it's a Content Management System, is it not!

I'm 17 weeks into the project now and i've learned a huge amount about what goes on and enough to take me forward 7/10 times.

17 weeks?

... 17 weeks!!

Trust me when I say: I'm not taking the piss! I am purely emphasising - I first came to Drupal last year and immediately recognised its potential. Life butted-in and I came back again about 6 weeks ago... I'm STILL moving an existing site over; hacking away, learning and tweaking. I too have started to ask,:Should it be this "awkward" and "fiddly"?

Additionally:

Would I persevere if I didn't enjoy doing it (or had no self-interest)?

Would I persevere if I didn't currently have the luxury of time I do ATM?

Developers (here), do enjoy working on it and have a self-interest. They most likely will make the time and we love "awkward" and "fiddly" processes/systems because without them, there'd be nothing to do. (BTW, I'm not suggesting that the devs here deliberately make things "awkward and fiddly").

And therein probably lies the juxtaposition between dev-heads and users and some of the dev-head answers above.

... which leads me to this...

STYRO:
In this situation Drupal doesn't need more non contributing users, it needs more contributors (eg coders, writers, donors, testers etc).

And that leads me nicely to the final point I wanted to make:

Drupal's name is getting out there. Even since last year when I first came here, I see a diifferent class of user on the forums. IMO, Drupal will hit a point of critical mass fairly soon (if it hasn't already started). Before bemoaning the non-contrib users it might be pertinent to ask: Whose fault is that?

Drupal front page:

"Equipped with a powerful blend of features, Drupal can support a variety of websites ranging from personal weblogs to large community-driven websites."

Nowhere have I seen a phrase that say's words to the effect, 'Drupal is a CMS made by developers, for developers".

Your reasoning is not unreasonable IMO, But it is what it now is. You equally leave yourself open to the counter-argument of; if you don't like non-contrib-users, form your own closed-community and build your own.

I've read Dries' articles on the need for a better UI - To my mind (and he may well concede the same), it was a bit late, but welcome nonetheless. This thread is all about just that... and I do mean, ALL.

Mike

A lot of the current Drupal developers were drawn to Drupal by the overall philosophy, flexibility and code quality and won't want to sacrifice that for short term 'gains'.

Why assume that in order to make something simpler and easier for the user that it requires "sacrificing" something?

And frankly the code quality of a lot of modules isn't good enough to be included in core.

Any yet, all modules are represented as being equal. (hence my suggestion that there be a list of "Drupal certified" modules) You guys already know which modules are "worthy."

Again, just suggestions, not criticisms. Perhaps this was a bad time for bringing up this subject. Since you guys are working so hard to push through some very exciting changes to Drupal that we will all be able to appreciate.

Please don't take these suggestions to mean that the community does not appreciate all the work that has been done and is being done. From what I've read, many of "ease of use" features will make an appearance in 4.8/5.0

Thanks Drupalers!!

We're getting closer to a real discussion.

Most of what you say is an argument for having quality code only in core. Agreed.

But that's not an argument against wanting to add modules if and when they are good enough.

Robert D is saying the consensus on core is to take modules out not in, presumably regardless of code quality.

The larger core gets, the harder it becomes to release new versions

Agreed again. But what's the point in releasing new versions of core if essential modules aren't good enough for it? "essential" needs defining, of course, and that is the debate thenicespider was trying to have and zoon_unit has eloquently, logically and politely continued.

Poor coding and documentation in modules is a big problem. Perhaps it will stay a problem for longer for modules that stay out of core and have no chance of getting near it. I'd expect so. zoon_unit's case for two tiers of modules gets stronger, I think.

I've tried them all. Joomla/Mambo, PhpNuke, Wordpress and Xoops. Drupal is the best of the lot. For functionality and flexibility, Drupal can't be beat. Keep up the great work Drupal!

http://fransonfamily.com

If you help in the support forums, you contribute. In fact, you can check the box in your profile that says, I help in the Drupal support forums.

Not all contribution is in the form of code. It is also in the form of support, in documentation, and in helping new people through the learning curve.

Here's a tip. If you find yourself answering the same question over and over and documentation doesn't exist in the handbook, write your answer there and link to it. If you are unsure where to add it, ask on the documentation list. If a place doesn't exist, then we'll find one.

-Steven Peck
---------
Test site, always start with a test site.
_{Drupal Best Practices Guide -|- Black Mountain}

Understood.

This supports the 2nd tier of authorised modules idea, i think. Which is perhaps implicit in the new install ideas. We'll see. Or the next round of newbies will, anyway.

See

http://drupal.org/node/81464#comment-149714

A genuine question.

Why are you coming back?

You laud other CMSs and blogging engines for their usability and criticise Drupal....

yet you are back, for a second time, to Drupal.

Drupal must be doing something right, so maybe you could balance your criticism of where Drupal is going wrong, and mention what Drupal is getting right.

Positive feedback helps too!

Having been with Drupal for only a year, even I see can improvements in usability since I started, and long me they, indeed all advances, within Drupal continue.

Regards
Alan

*if you don't like it go away OR learn the system. What kind of an answer is that? How unfriendly if not downright rude?*

Whoever answered that way would be FAMOUS in this forum (notoriously) - since I started with Drupal (from Geocities HTML to Simple Forum to Xoops to Drupal 4.6.3) I hadnt complained much about Drupal (as a newbie and non programmer) simply because it was the right CMS to begin with, worth learning and tweaking yourself (and I didnt complaint that Drupal 463 was this and that COMPARED to Xoops etc) and I didnt recall anybody here treating newbies rudely or impolitely ushering away from Drupal.org

But if you thought that someone who gave some kind of advice like `if you complaint so much about Drupal then go somewhere else' in a polite manner and tone, that should be forgiven because a lot of newbies just would not want to learn something new just because he / she is accustomed to something different

*For example - Xoops has that `click here and there to put the block left-right-center-middle' and I remembered pretty well this one guy who sounded like YELLING `why Drupal doesnt have that block placement UI'? So he was ushered away to using Xoops - end of yelling and whining.

I reckoned that why so many responded to this thread is the title `Drupal Disadvantages'

Well, disadvantages according to the topic starter - that is why so many replied with quite strong voices

The guy should now understand that what he said/thought as `DISADVANTAGES' are trivial, or manageable

The absence of included editor is not a disadvantage at all - it is strategically (done on prupose) to keep core package small and beautiful

The renaming of TAXONOMY (Vocabulary and Terms) to `Category' is a horrible proposal because really the TAXONOMY is the Power of Drupal which sets it apart from other CMS - may we say it `the DISADVANTAGES of Non-Drupal which will not be better'

The next step in this sense would be to assign editors who should care to keep things "compact".

There are already too few people working on documentation within the handbooks. It's highly doubtful there would be enough volunteers to implement this strategy effectively.

-----
Charlie Lowe | cyberdash
Tips for posting to the Drupal forums

I agree with you that it's difficult for people to write (Personally speaking, I know this as well as anyone), but since I see programmers debating well here often, I believe they can explain how their modules work -- and probably better than anyone since they created them. It doesn't have be looked at as though they are teaching. They are just explaining what their modules can do, how to install them, how to make them work, and how to make tailored changes, etc. Common, everday English would work best.

It seems to me that there are an exceptional amount of educated people here who are proficient with the English language and have exceptional grammar and editing skills (I am not one of them :( ), and these bright and talented people hopefully would volunteer a few hours a week to help when it comes to clarifying and editing the entries for the handbook. It would be a collaborative effort, and for the benefit of the whole community.

I think you make an excellent point about using a taxonomy based structure for better navigation and search. And I agree that it would demonstrate the power and usefulness of taxonomy as well -- and it may even bring some clarity and understanding for people who haven't quite gotten a handle on it. (I'm raising my hand.)

I think that both your suggestion and mine do overlap to some degree. But I also think they both are different in many respects and would provide different benefits to the community as well. So I think a taxonomy struction and a talentshow could both benefit everyone and also complement one another. So, I think that they both should be considered.

Since I'm a newbie and not that familiar with implementing taxonomy, it is only a guess that it would require a great deal of effort and skill to implement your suggestion right away. And I certainly wouldn't even dare to offer any suggestion there. I know nothing.

However, I think that it's possible to implement my suggestion fairly easily. Wouldn't it just be a matter of opening a new thread in the forum and posting an invite and guidelines? (That would just be the first step, obviously.)

...And I was just thinking. Maybe there could be an incentive offered to participants and contributors. Maybe it could be like a contest, in that the best entry for a particular month is displayed on Drupal's home page along with the contributor/programmer's name, and the entry/person retains that position until the next month's 'winner' replaces it/her/him. (A free Drupal t-shirt wouldn't be a bad idea either. ;) I might even have to learn php for one of those. :D ) And the winner could be determined by community vote. (?)

I don't know. Maybe programmers just aren't into sport - fun and friendly competition. (?)

Off topic here: I'm curious, What does "servus" mean?

I loved that username, FWIW.

---
www.whatwoulddrupaldo.org

Why 2 computers? 2 browsers on 1 computer works fine as well. I configure/administer using Safari and have FireFox open if I need to check something, just a flip between windows to check the result....

And sometimes I use Masquerade....

No system can do 'everything' out of the box. You and me have definitely different needs....config and install!

The one thing that throws me here is the use of the word taxonomy. I'm not sure what that is or why stuffed dead animals have anything to do with a CMS.

Heh, that's taxidermy, not taxonomy. :P

Or, for example, filed issues in the publish / subscribe issue tracker.

That will happen, but not until I understand the problem, better. I'll definitely be doing something to fix this for my own purposes, because (assuming things go as I hope they will with a proposal we've got out there right now), I'll be needing it in the next couple of months to implement an n-tier publishing workflow. I don't have the bandwidth to learn enough about the Drupal API to fix it in the form of a module patch, at least not right now, and I'm not sure you want my PHP in your core anyway. Seriously.

As for whether core architecture decisions are made "against" or "for" -- I think such decisions are usually made "for". In practice, they have an effect that's "against."

The "survey form combo" is a new one on me; maybe it's not on the canonical 4.7 list, yet? Once I get past this launch, I'll look at it. I would love a more elegant solution than what I've got.

Which raises a process issue: I wanted (desperately) a better WYSIWYG solution than TinyMCE, but FCKeditor wasn't listed as being compatible with 4.7. After poring throug the CVS messages for a while, I figured out that it probably was, and gave it a shot. Works great, and addresses the key things that were giving me agitta about TinyMCE. There are probably a dozen other modules out there in a similar state.

(For the record, TinyMCE is pretty nice, but it was just not able to do some things that were very important for my needs. E.g., no support for H* tags, and it wiped out all of my embedded JavaScript and deleted all my line feeds and tabs. So I'm sure it's fine for some things -- seems to load a lot faster than FCK -- but it just wasn't going to cut it for a content-heavy shop like ours.)

Point being, it would be super wonderful if there were an easy way to tell what modules are compatible with 4.7 but still not "ready for prime time." That's good enough for a lot of us, and it would help the maintainers get testing data.

Ok, this has to be the dumbest post ever and it wasted an hour of my time reading it. Another suggestion is software is a tool to make our life much easier. What company is going to spend and waste their time on an employee who "just likes the basics"? Granted my site runs on Drupal and it does have its flexibilities. However, these posts about "Drupal" is a stripped down version of windows" are starting to annoy me. Software is a privilege, and molded to the user, developer, or average user. It should come ready to fit everyone's needs no matter what your skill level is. Drupal makes my skin crawl and people who say Drupal is just fine the way it is, are not really helping it expand. Rather they are "defending" the quality work the Drupal developers have done. Drupal has more issues than I "almost" have time for. Who cares about who is dumb enough and who is smarter? The point here is if you want "path_auto" or WYSIWYG" or every module like "Windows Xp" has, then we are saying “Windows 95” is much better than Xp because it is smaller and faster. Size does not matter, and the most experienced developers on this site really do not get "new ideas.” If Drupal were not so damn stubborn 90% of the time, then maybe I would have more free time. However, not everyone needs everything, and not everyone knows HTML, not everyone really gives a damn how big or flexible it is. Does Drupal save money? Not! Does Drupal make it easier for the user? Some of us are dumb and hooked on Drupal is really getting to me. If a company likes saving money, time, and effort, then Drupal is your worst enemy.

Drupal is behind schedule here, and the Drupal support is more concerned about a Windows 95 then staying up with what everyone needs. Package the modules that work, and throw the crap ones out. I have used and installed more trash than drupal respects.

The way the world and society is moving forward, the more others are still asking about a PHPbb integration, or a game script, WYSIWYG debate.

Why are the most experienced defending old ways, when new ones could be must easier? 90% of these posts are still suggesting Drupal stays the same.

Drupal cannot take criticism well, and are not open minded enough to cater the wide range of skill.

Drupal uses the damn, patch files I have still yet to get. Do not explain me what the procedure is, just make it so it works!

Look through the forum and realize how many do not understand the word "easier.” Our life needs to be easy, and most of us do have an outside life. If drupal is your best friend, you do not have an outside life. Your more involved with installing 10 image modules, 12 SEF's, 3 File managers, 50 templates that look like my dead grandma, and a profile system that reminds me of Mr. Rogers neighborhood.

My drupal site is more sophisticated than probably 99% out there. There has been over 4000 hours spent cleaning up what is not there. 4000 hours is an underestimate. Drupal will probably end up costing my marriage, health, and freedom. This is not an over estimate. Who wants to hire a housekeeper that spends 8 hours when others could do it for cheaper? Time is money, and money is freedom. Drupal has none of these. It is a tool for seventh graders to play on while cartoons keep you company.

Drupal does not really care about making life easier, it is more of a play toy for most rather than a time saver.

Do this and I do not care for feedback. I am not here to comfort you, and I am not here to say drupal sucks the fat like an empty wallet.

Package up two zips. One for the next bill gates and one for welfare sum bags. This waybill gates can do his thing, and the scumbags can get what they need without bill gate's help. If you are a bill gates like me, then rock on. If you are a sum bag like me, then Rock harder. Drupal sucks to flexibility. The only flex it is capable of is the inability to suite the needs of "everyone.”

Everyone needs to be the key word. If you are fighting over a Windows 95 vs. a Windows XP, which one are you going to choose? It is that simple. Keep it simple and maybe we will not be so stupid!

-Casper Script

Cabins Creations You only need this site to keep you entertained for days.