[_] Drupal work wanted
Ryan T Nerd
bristol.developer.ryan at gmail.com
Mon Feb 11 13:56:46 GMT 2013
"Care to back that up? :-)" "Otherwise, if you haven't anything nice to say, don't say anything at all :-)" So which is it? ;) On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 1:49 PM, James Panton <james at menusandblocks.co.uk>wrote: > > On 11 Feb 2013, at 13:03, Ryan T Nerd <bristol.developer.ryan at gmail.com> > wrote: > > > First things first, that link only works if you take off the word might, > > though I'm still not 100% sure of the relevance tbh. > > http://harthur.wordpress.com/2013/01/24/771/ > > The point of that link was a reminder that it's people who create open > source, people with feelings, and to simply tell them their work is rubbish > is unkind. > > Positive criticism is useful and patches are very welcome :-) > > > Drupal is terrible. > > You mean, *you* think Drupal is terrible. Facts are facts and opinions are > opinions. Arrogance is not appreciated. > > > 1. It murders databases with about 38937 more queries than should be > needed > > for any given task. > > Drupal makes a lot of queries. This is because the underlying philosophy > of Drupal is to be as flexible as possible, which in turn tends to > abstraction of the various systems, which can lead to more code and queries > than might be expected for a seemingly trivial task. > > The huge benefit is the flexibility of the system. The developers of > Drupal have *no idea* how it's going to be used and it is used for a huge > variety o things no-one expected. The fact that it can handle these > different, unplanned uses is wonderful. > > All the non-programmers who use it to create what they need are > *extremely* grateful. > > > 2. It's slow. Hideously so. > > It's fast. Very fast. > A slow Drupal site is mis-configured. > > > 3. It's like MVC never existed, there is literally no separation between > > the data you want, and its presentation. > > There's complete separation between the data and presentation. > I've found this very useful when outputting Drupal data as JSON or XML > rather than the default HTML. > > > 4. Small companies use it for purposes that it's really not fit for (I > > admit not Drupal's fault per se but a reason for my hatred of it) because > > of its main advantage of being quick to build things in and being > possible > > to build a basic site with very little skill. > > This is one of the best things about Drupal: it's used in totally > unexpected ways. > Power to the people. > > > 5. 3rd party modules are a pain in the arse. Often poorly-written and > with > > dodgy security, frequently abandoned, etc. The existence of such a large > > library of items of wildly-varying quality leads employers in the Drupal > > sphere to conclude that you can build xyz in 3 seconds because a module > > exists that almost does what you want, failing to understand that often > the > > modules lack the flexibility to do EXACTLY what your client needs, > leaving > > the options of a new module, horrific hacks or modifying a 3rd party > module > > [please never ever do any of these things] > > Some extremely complex functionality has been built with third-party > modules, showing the power of the underlying system. > It takes time to work out the good from the bad, but there's plenty of > guidance from the Drupal community if you ask for it. > > > 6. It's so damn procedural > > Because for a long time it has supported lowest-common-demoninator > hosting, which meant old versions of PHP. > Drupal really tries to be as inclusive as possible, which can lead to some > difficult technical and architectural decisions. > But that inclusiveness is probably one the Drupal's key strengths. > > > 7. Have you ever tried untangling a mess of modules all interacting with > > each other where something's not working? Again, usually a problem when > > dealing with 2nd hand code. > > Yes. > A problem with all 2nd hand code? It's the price you pay for not > re-inventing the wheel. > Was the documentation not good enough? Did you help fix it? > > > 8. Projects created in Drupal are a maintenance nightmare. At the > employers > > who have used Drupal, it has invariably been the Drupal sites which were > > unmaintainable, barely hanging on by a thread, while CodeIgniter stuff > is a > > relative joy to work with. > > I have seen *so* many awful implementations of Drupal in my time, so can > totally feel for you here. > Generally, the problem has been experienced programmers using Drupal for > the first time. What why find difficult is the concept of *not* writing any > code unless you have to. > It's an understandable problem: used to coding new functionality, they > don't look to what's already there and go off and write something when they > don't need to. Many see *configuring* functionality beneath them and feel > they can write a better solution. Those people generally make the worst > Drupal sites. > > > Note that I say all this as someone who has buggered off to do Java > > instead, with a nice bit of Struts and Hibernate for good measure. I can > > honestly say I don't miss Drupal one bit! > > I'm glad you're happy where you are now. Enjoy your Struts and Hibernate. > > But do remember, an awful lot of people, the world over, have put a lot of > time and effort in Drupal and are constantly striving to make it better. As > I said before, positive criticism and patches are really welcome, so rather > than merely dismissing other people's hard work with ridiculous and untrue > statements, please jump into the issue queues ( > http://drupal.org/project/issues/drupal) and show us how it can be > improved. > > Otherwise, if you haven't anything nice to say, don't say anything at all > :-) > > James > > > > -- > underscore_ list info/archive -> > http://www.under-score.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/underscore > -- Please do not send me spam, nor pass my email address onto recruitment agencies as I have quite enough spam already and am *not looking for a job*[I already have one thanks]. May have some interest in collaboration around Android development.