If you're as organized as I am when it comes to managing files, modules and other resources, then you'll likely find it just as frustrating to find that modules no longer respect their folder name when browsing through them in the app level.
At the very least, I would expect to see some mention of the folder that it's in, either through a prefix (e.g. "Fields / {Module}" or as a sub title.
I am referring to this overview:
P.s. Speaking of which, the way modules are inserted at the moment feel kind of isolated. I think they should be integrated alongside or similar to components; I often find myself looking there instead.
Totally understand the desire to keep modules organized and completely agree this is a great feature request and I can file this right now for you.
Modules definitely feel isolated, they are one of Retool's earlier features that was built more independently and have been tricky for new engineers to update and maintain as the company has been growing very rapidly
We have a lot of module requests as they have much room to improve. Our support team has been lobbying heavily for a v2 reboot to address their many needs. I think with our more recent release of folder organization systems this FR can hopefully be addressed quicker than some of the other module related FRs
I strongly feel like modules are the best way to make an application more robust. They provide better namespacing, are more performant and provide better organization overall. I think they should be treated as first-class citizens, IMHO
To expand on this topic a little further; having a VueJS background, I get a sense that modules are in fact (custom) components in disguise.
Perhaps it would make more sense to have an option to add custom components, but I realize how this could intrude on the existing feature to script together your own components.
However, maybe these two functions could be merged. That is, to allow for input and output parameters when it comes to custom components.
In my experience so far, I have found several cases where I needed to use modules for something as small as fields. While I am referring to these as modules, they feel more like components.
We recently got news that Modules will be having a some tender love and care from the engineering team so I am looking forward to that and will keep you looped in on updates for when to expect that.
Custom components and modules do have a whole lot of similarities and overlap
To your second point, are you thinking of having an option to add custom components into modules? I agree, custom components can intrude on the existing architecture that connects components together.
I think this is exactly what you are thinking of, it is a newer feature that came with our v2 custom components along with our new custom component library functionality.
The line between modules and components and get more and more blurry as we add more functionality
All these tools fall on a spectrum between writing code/full customization and pre-built ease of use for common use cases.
We hope to empower our users and to meet their needs and are always looking to learn more about what gaps are not covered by our tools and solution options.
Well, actually, I was merely reflecting on the idea of modules actually being components. Now they are called 'modules', but it would have made more sense if they were called '(custom) components'.
I realize this is just a thought and it would be tough renaming modules to components, but I feel like it would make more sense. This occurred to me after creating relatively small modules with only a field, and instantiating them elsewhere.
So it was more of a reconsideration rather than any specific change request, to be honest. I guess the less terminology the better and modules is currently a bit left out, from my experience at least.
Totally understand, modules are a bit of a relic from Retool's early days and it would be better if they had other major differences that made it more clear to users where they fit in the building and development cycle.
