This is a translated article that originally was written by Chio,  published on websitebaker.at

Modules

The AMASP has set itself the task to list all modules and snippets. To list, not to check. That would be simply too much. Instead, the module authors are encouraged to keep their own modules up to date.

This is already a part of the problem:  modules that do not belong to the "extended core" of WebsiteBaker, no one really feels responsible. Often not even their authors.

Where do modules come from

Most of the modules were created of the fact that someone would have a specific function on its site, has programmed it, and then again has provided it for free to the community .

A common pitfall here is that the module was made for a specific task and the developer knows it inside out. And me too: all pages, on which I for example use "Topics"  have a white page background - including this example here. I did not think that it could be different.

If one module is once released, one's hands are tied: It is said to be compatible. The rapid change is not possible, it will be difficult. And for God's reward.

The Top3 CMS Joomla, Typo3, Drupal do not only have  just a few hundred modules, but just a few thousand. This does not necessarily mean that there are more needles in a haystack - but that the haystack is greater.

For example Joomla has masses of modules that would display the local weather - would, if the operator of the weather service  had not changed the API.

Copy&Paste Incest

Many modules are based on a different module.  You do not have toreinvent the wheel everytime. But now some of the earlier modules have had some weaknesses, often copied into new modules. For a long time eg the guestbook module was the the only meaningful "interaction" module.And "News" the only one that generated own pages. And "Bookmarks" the only one that could summarize things in groups. An error in "Bookmarks" has been taken eg in "team" and "Members". A small error in the "News" has stuck for a long time in the much younger "Bakery".
Especially the "guest book" was a base for all possible modules and have been copied constantly. So: all modules built on the guestbook can not be up to date.

Quality Initiative?

Sad - but true: many modules are outdated. Some can not uninstall itself. Some have troubles with the search. Some are a "frickeld", in the lack of any standard. The authors in the meantime have  5 children and simply others hobbies.

But who will take over and continue their work? A team of quality management will fail on long range. Programming styles and own views collide with each other too much. Instead of improving a module it is often less work to start a new one and create: => another module ...

And anyway: where to start? Time to find other ways?

Evaluation!

Which modules are important? Which ones are useful? Which modules do only need some few lines of fresh code and they will be working again? And where is hops and malt lost?

Rating systems (such as Star Rating) are not very objective and easy to be forged. On the other hand: who cares? Who will push a long-forgotten module? The mass makes it,  all attempts of counterfeiting are leveled by broad-based evaluation  (Google proves that again and again)

As a starting point once again AMASP could be preferred: AMASP fortunately is missing the "official coat", a comment function along with star rating would be installed quickly and at least could be maintained for a limited time range.

Back