The general trend these days is to limit the number of projects in a visual studio solution:
The two project solution Project antipattern Multiple projects considered harmful Evolutionary project structure
The helix documentation and Habitat are implemented with many many projects in the solution. This to me seems like a serious code smell. If I were to implement a Helix solution with a limited number of projects, how minimal could I go?
I think I would start with 4: Project, Foundation, Features and Tests.
What would I lose by not having 65 different projects? Or what do I gain by having them? If it's only organizational, then easy peasy. What dependency control is achieved with many projects? Maybe I'm missing something, but at this point, the pain seems to far outweigh the benefits.