kgw wrote
I assure you that I did read your post in its entirety (twice) prior to replying. If there is documentation explaining that all modules are uploaded as zip files, I didn't see it. If such documentation does exist, then a simple "cut'n'paste" or hyperlink in the module installation instructions would be even easier/simpler than my suggestion of adding one sentence.
I usually don't go the extra step of "chewing it up" (as we say in my country) for the user. We all owe some consideration to volunteers and my personal policy is to exhaust resources before posting a question. Of course not all of us follow this policy. Still, I expect users to do some homework before posting.
kgw wrote
Reading my previous post, you will note that I did say it was a very nice feature. The fact that it is an unexpected nice feature may be what causes some confusion. You must agree that it is a bit unusual, and certainly was not a feature the the various php apps, publishing tools, website upload systems, etc. that I was accustomed to.
I only agree to the extent that creative features are unexpected rather than unusual. However, some reading solves any issue. I am sure you did some reading for your newest cell phone; why aren't you willing to conceed that the user should read about this piece of technology, especially since it is not wordprocessing software but a framework for a portal and in itself and advanced piece of programming? The fact that you are not used to its quirks already urges you to learn and the suggested way to start is by reading.
kgw wrote
I don't doubt that people who have been using DNN for a long time will already know all these little tricks, but us noobs do not. That does not mean we are stupid or that our suggestions have no value. Nor does it indicate that we fail to read before posting or didn't go through the module installation instructions several times. Nor does it mean that anyone is suggesting the undoing of the feature.
You suggested that the expected behavior was to upload a single file and I replicated that the expected behavior was in the Installation Guide, my omission (and a crucial one) was not being explicit about the "DNN Installation Guide"
kgw wrote
Put the docs in a wiki, or make them editable some other way, and I'll be happy to simply make appropriate edits as I run across them, and not annoy anyone. I write similar documentation as part of my job anyway, so it's no bother. I'm sure that others will do the same.
Is it my imagination, or are some people on this forum a wee bit defensive or overly sensitive? DNN is a helluva fine thing, but that doesn't mean it's easy to figure out or that the documentation can't benefit from the immediate hand-on experience of fresh eyes.
(I don't expect you to publish this in the forum, it being somewhat off-topic, but I doubt I am the only one who is curious about the "overly-sensitive" thing.)
The Core Team does take criticism in a constructive way and your post approval is a proof of that. I do not think anyone is overly sensitive or a bit defensive. It's hard for the written word to convey the true tone of what a user is trying to say. For my part, I always go straight to the point. I don't like embellishing my participation in this forums. I believe that if a single sentence suffices, then a single sentence must be written. In retrospect I said: Read the manual, here's the page. And then I said: Read my post, the info is in the referred text.
Just to make my point, I've made the exception and gone the extra step: INSTALLATION GUIDE page 47
