In 5.2.2, DNN changed the way that modules are added to DNN user the Host/Module Definitions section. DNN have attempted to streamline the process for adding a new module, by putting all the previous combersome steps into a single form, which in theory is a great idea.  However, if you attempt to add a new control module, you will note a new item "Owner Folder". By defaul, it is set to "<Not Specifed>" and sherefore show all module folders under "DesktopModules" as expected. If you go ahead and enter your module details in the remaining fields, "Module Folder", "Resource", "Name" and "Description" and submit the form, you will find the page submission fails but doesn't display an error. You will find that your new module is displayed in the list of modules under Host/Module Definitions, but if you try to edit the module definition, you will find it is incomplete and therefore unusable.

It would now appear as if DNN want you to create an "owners folder" under the DesktopModules folder to prevent any name conficts with other modules. However on experimentation, it appears as if this only works if you add a separate folder under /DesktopModules/OwnerFolder for each *.ascx control, otherwise you will get an error adding the module (reorded in the event log) reporting a duplicate foreign key in Packages table.  This is also a bug as you should (and have been able to on previous versions), have as many *.ascx controls in one folder as you like, without having to separate them into individual folders for each and every *.ascx file. 

Comments anyone????

duuhh... Do you really think I didn't do that already?

I have seached extensively for the SAME problem as this, and it is not reported either on this forum, or in Gemini. I'm not trying to waste anybody's time, just report a problem and get some meaningful feedback. It seems the DNN community is so quick to dismiss issues if they even remotely sound likesomething esle that has been reported, instead of treating the post with due respect.

If indeed this problem has already been reported, then please be so kind as to reveal the location where I can see the action/response being taken by DNN developers to address the issue.

Hi Joe

Thanks for your comments and accepted.

I have already posted this in Gemini and the editor dismissed the problem and linked it to an existing problem which is similar, but different. I pointed this out in a followup comment post with detailed information. This has fallen on deaf ears, so I have attempted to get a better response from this forum.  Forgive my frustration. It's just annoying when some people who respond to these posts which are often desperate pleas for help, get basically an unhelpful response (if any....).