What about an actual module architecture?

[adico]

The whole idea of modules is the ease of integration AND the ability to combine multiple modules from multiple authors without conflicts (assuming that all are well written). Here modules are really just patches - while they are supposed to go to only one directory - in practice they make changes to many core pages, thus making the integration of the next module a nightmare. This is done because the current architecture is not flexible enough to accommodate the changes needed by modules.

 

What I am proposing is that we move to a true module friendly yet more structured environment. It should work something like this:

 

1. Core pages (the pages that display the store and are part of the main distribution) will be empty of content and with very little structure. Instead core pages would have anchors that could be loaded by modules.

2. The features of the main distribution will come as preinstalled modules - to allow other modules to override them.

3. Each anchor is managed independently of the modules. For each anchor, the admin can set the modules that are visible and in what order. This will allow module-install to hide other conflicting modules for a given anchor/page.

4. Modules will have to conform to a strict interface. To change the look of core pages. their authors must use only built-in anchors. Of course, each module can add new visible pages in it own directory.

5. Modules cannot change existing tables or remove fields.

6. Submitted modules should be peer reviewed.

 

I installed this store on my site and was quite happy with the look and functionality. As I tried to add additional modules it became clear that:

a. it is a lot of (unnecessary) work

b. future upgrade are going to be a nightmare

I hope you can fix the module problem so I can use it with confidence.

 

thanks,

Adi