I read this question by Tim a while ago in an older thread.
It has sort of been mulling in my head.
A lot of authors who contribute to repositories / directories understandably create a single product that is an all-in-one solution of sorts.
What bothers me though, is that sometimes one only needs a small part of a plugin.
And some of the functions may be replicated across the more “commercial” plugins.
A number of plugin authors also use open source code (let’s say 20% of the plugin to be generous) that covers all the essential functionality of a plugin, but then write another 80% of the plugin that simply deals with user-interaction (admin menus and such) and pretty much nothing else.
There are also plugins and plugins. Some may be one simple function. Others may have several folders and dozens of files.
So, what would be best practice for encouraging granular plugins?
Part of the USP (as discussed in Elisabetta’s post) is that CP will give control back to its users by not just being modular, but also by being granular.
If reducing bloat is a core coding philosophy for CP, how is it possible to encourage plugin authors to also adhere to it, by, for example, creating a core plugin with multiple extensions instead of just having one very large plugin?