2) If there is a problem, here's what you could do about it, in descending order of attractiveness:
y) specify the requirements (a sample application of what needs to be supported would be a start) z) review the existing options wrt to those requirements (which ones are you aware about, why don't they work for you?) (*)
a) Fix it yourself
b) Pay someone else to fix it
c) Motivate or politely encourage others to fix it, providing moral support, etc.
d) provide framework organisation (repo, discussion venu, code outline, issue and task tracking, ..) so that others can contribute small patches instead of having to take on full responsibilities? (*) IMO, the lack of good quality reviews of hackage contributions (especially over whole usage areas, such as web development, GUIs, databases, ..) has been a major and growing obstacle to hackage use, not to mention targetting of efforts. Some form of wiki-based "hackage reviews" column (with editor-in-charge, invited reviews, and mild reviewing of reviews for obvious problems, but otherwise free-form and -schedule) would probably work, if integrated into hackage itself. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to edit such a thing, but perhaps others here feel motivated to do so? Claus