The module operation should be encapsulated in a black box
 

The module operation should be encapsulated in a black box. Because normal users do not get used to this term.

I think this term is for
engineers. For the user, they should have simple windows or simple commands to install the software and do the related configuration.
E.g. for install and configure the Chinese pinyin input.

Bodhi uses Module to load and install the feature.
Given this is new to me , so I do some checking.

I find it is
used in Ruby programming Language:
"Modules

Modules are a way of grouping together methods, classes, and constants. Modules give you two major benefits:
Modules provide a namespace and prevent name clashes.
Modules implement the mixin facility."

This module way, maybe excellent for coding,
but NOT for users without
software background.

so in backend, we don't need to change any things,we can continue to use Module concept in OS development.
But in the front end ,
it should be hided from users. For users, make is simple by just
pick and add. Make it as easy as to install from Bodhi App

Please do not fight with Moksha terms!

Enlightenment creators built modular desktop consisted of modules. It was their decision and we will not change it. Lot of stuff is related to modules. As I said several times before, Bodhi is not for everyone. Unfortunately not for new Linux users. Desktop is different and needs some time to understand and use all benefits which provides. Loading modules is an activity I do just once after Bodhi install. Not on daily basis. I see no reason devoting our time for fully working stuff.

If you can not live with it, clone moksha code, make your changes, compile, build to deb and use.

Stefan

Moksha/Enlightenment didn't invent this terminology. I remember fvwm had modules back in the 1990s. And what else would you call a subsidiary program that links into a bigger one?

Wikipedia claims enlightenment grew from fvwm. So it is unsurprising they share some similar terminologies.

And I agree with Stefan, "Please do not fight with Moksha terms!" It is not hard to learn the basic enlightenment based terminologies for things on our desktop. We are not changing what is it 20 or 30 years worth of tradition. Sure gnome users may prefer we call Shelves panels and .... But we attract users hunting for an "Enlightenment like desktop" and this kind of user prob knows fully well how to use enlightenment and what things are traditionally called.

@hazel, ran across a fairly interesting distro a week or so ago: KISS. From the programmer than brings us Neofetch.

Nice! Reminds me a bit of Crux. And very traditional. But the basic system looks as if it was written for a bare board, not a proper desktop machine. I mean musl and busybox!