Zoltán Lehóczky

A bit of a summer slump in volume, but the response/close time numbers are incredibly good, with most paid support options paling in comparison.

Yes, indeed, this just needs to be extended by the folder deletion, and a config for that.

Please fill out the issue template (you can get it from [here](https://github.com/OrchardCMS/OrchardCore/issues/new?assignees=&labels=enhancement&projects=&template=feature_request.md&title=)) fully, because I'm unclear on what your issue is about.

I think conceptually this is a similar issue to https://github.com/OrchardCMS/OrchardCore/issues/9444. I this for named/reusable parts?

Yeah, but isn't this something useful for named/reusable parts? Because `GetPartDefinitionAsync(part).Fields` will be the same as `GetTypeDefinitionAsync(type).Parts.FirstOrDefault(p => p.Name == part).PartDefinition.Fields` except for reusable parts.

Can you please explain why `Order` doesn't work? I think it should only be a problem if both dependencies have the same `Order` (like having the default 0). But If...

Hmm. We'd then have three ways to configure this (module dependency, `Order`, middleware ordering) with different drawbacks. I looked into why ASP.NET Core doesn't have anything for middleware dependencies/such ordering,...

> IMO you really don't need to define feature Media.Security instead you should just define MediaSecurityStartup with RequeresFeature("User.Security", "Media") That's not really suitable here. Unlike something like modules extending Audit...

Did you address my most recent comment?

I checked the code, and it doesn't seem so. Sorry, but I can't allocate any more time to argue for avoiding comments that just state the obvious, so I won't...