[Meta] Discuss how to merge new modules into core

Created on 14 May 2012, about 13 years ago
Updated 26 June 2023, about 2 years ago

This summer I'm likely going to be working on ✨ Pathauto in Core Needs work and I'm seeing several options for how I can propose merging Pathauto (or other potential modules) into core.

  1. Lieutenant model: This is my preferred option. Pathauto would continue to "live" in contrib and would be "bundled" in the core repository from the 8.x-1.x branch. Is this possible it all (maybe using git sub-modules)? If so what changes would we need to make to have this possible? It was brought up at Dries' core conversation in Denver but it hasn't really been discussed since then.
  2. Normal merge: When we merge modules into core there can be two different ways it can be done.
    1. Enhancement: Merge into an existing core module, for example, merge Pathauto with path.module. How does this work if someone wants to turn off automatic aliasing (or whatever feature the merged module adds)?
    2. Add as-is: This would copy/paste all of Pathauto's files into core/modules/pathauto and if approved enable Pathauto as part of the standard install.

I would first just like to really discuss if the Lieutenant model is possible, feasible, and something that Dries/catch would agree to doing because that is highly my preferred option. I just don't want to waste my time attempting to merge in Pathauto if it's not going to be a plan that I don't agree with.

Regardless of how it is merged in, we would continue to probably use a core fork sandbox and provide patches based on diffs of that sandbox compared to 8.x.

πŸ“Œ Task
Status

Active

Version

9.5

Component
OtherΒ  β†’

Last updated 1 day ago

Created by

πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡ΈUnited States dave reid Nebraska USA

Live updates comments and jobs are added and updated live.
Sign in to follow issues

Comments & Activities

Not all content is available!

It's likely this issue predates Contrib.social: some issue and comment data are missing.

  • Status changed to Postponed: needs info about 1 month ago
  • πŸ‡³πŸ‡ΏNew Zealand quietone

    There hasn't been any discussion here for 13 years suggesting this is no longer needed. This title identifies this as a discussion and the issue summary has no tasks or proposed resolution to use as a guide to closing this issue.

    The preferred "Lieutenant model" is akin to what Drupal CMS is doing, so, in effect that is happening now. And there is a developing process to have an active core strategy in place. The current one is Drupal Core Strategy 2025-2028 πŸ“Œ Drupal Core strategy for 2025-2028 Active . Some of this discussion can happen during the consultation process used to development the strategy. Those point support closing this issue.

    Is there any remaining task here that is not already covered in another issue?

    I am setting the status to Postponed (maintainer needs more info). If we don't receive additional information to help with the issue, it may be closed after three months.

Production build 0.71.5 2024