Convert '_none' option to a constant and deprecate form_select_options()

Rebased against 11.x Branch.

The Needs Review Queue Bot → tested this issue. It fails the Drupal core commit checks. Therefore, this issue status is now "Needs work".

This does not mean that the patch needs to be re-rolled or the MR rebased. Read the Issue Summary, the issue tags and the latest discussion here to determine what needs to be done.

Consult the Drupal Contributor Guide → to find step-by-step guides for working with issues.

Rebased branch to 11.x, but getting some Functional tests failures

Tests pass

Title + MR title mention deprecating form_select_options but that doesn't appear to be the case.

You're right, I'll put it back with the trigger_error.
Shall I create a new CR for the deprecation or add it to the current draft?

Lets do a new one for the deprecation.

Current one could use some love but think adding a constant deserves to be separate.

OK. And one more question. Is core/tests/Drupal/KernelTests/Core/Form a good place to put the deprecation test?

Think that should be good since the function isn't in a module. Least I can't think of a better spot

Ughh the code removes form_get_options() too

Don't the new methods need tests for themselves?

dimitriskr → changed the visibility of the branch 11.x to hidden.

dimitriskr → changed the visibility of the branch 9.5.x to hidden.

Please ignore the change in .gitlab-ci.yml, which is for debugging purposes, all other changes and reported feedback are ready for this issue

Left some feedback.

Thanks @smustgrave.
Moreover in 📌 Deprecate form_get_options() Closed: duplicate it was proposed to remove form_get_options() as there is no usage in core and (then) in contrib. We need to see if we still want to do that here

In https://drupal.slack.com/archives/C1BMUQ9U6/p1707853736065729 , catch agreed to remove form_get_options() completely

The Needs Review Queue Bot → tested this issue. It fails the Drupal core commit checks. Therefore, this issue status is now "Needs work".

This does not mean that the patch necessarily needs to be re-rolled or the MR rebased. Read the Issue Summary, the issue tags and the latest discussion here to determine what needs to be done.

Consult the Drupal Contributor Guide → to find step-by-step guides for working with issues.

Still appears to have some open threads in the test. But rest is looking real good.

Keshav Patel → made their first commit to this issue’s fork.

Fixed Tests and updated depreciations.

Seems its ready for review.

The Needs Review Queue Bot → tested this issue. It no longer applies to Drupal core. Therefore, this issue status is now "Needs work".

This does not mean that the patch necessarily needs to be re-rolled or the MR rebased. Read the Issue Summary, the issue tags and the latest discussion here to determine what needs to be done.

Consult the Drupal Contributor Guide → to find step-by-step guides for working with issues.

Bot false positive.

Rebased to latest head, seems it ready for review.

Only did a light review but you get the flow.

Overall looks good though.

Review comments addressed.

The Needs Review Queue Bot → tested this issue. It no longer applies to Drupal core. Therefore, this issue status is now "Needs work".

This does not mean that the patch necessarily needs to be re-rolled or the MR rebased. Read the Issue Summary, the issue tags and the latest discussion here to determine what needs to be done.

Consult the Drupal Contributor Guide → to find step-by-step guides for working with issues.

The Needs Review Queue Bot → tested this issue. It no longer applies to Drupal core. Therefore, this issue status is now "Needs work".

This does not mean that the patch necessarily needs to be re-rolled or the MR rebased. Read the Issue Summary, the issue tags and the latest discussion here to determine what needs to be done.

Consult the Drupal Contributor Guide → to find step-by-step guides for working with issues.

Feedback appears to be address here. I see nothing outstanding.

The Needs Review Queue Bot → tested this issue. It fails the Drupal core commit checks. Therefore, this issue status is now "Needs work".

This does not mean that the patch necessarily needs to be re-rolled or the MR rebased. Read the Issue Summary, the issue tags and the latest discussion here to determine what needs to be done.

Consult the Drupal Contributor Guide → to find step-by-step guides for working with issues.

Commented on MR with suggestion to meet CS line length issue flagged by NR bot.

Rebased. I applied the comment line length suggestion, but I'm restoring the RTBC status anyway since it's a very minor change.

The title reads like a list of changes instead it should be a description of what is being fixed or improved. Can this return to the simpler, original title? Remember, The title is used as the git commit message so it should be meaningful and concise. See List of issue fields → .

There are two change records here and neither has been reviewed. That needs to be done. However, I don't think we need a change record to announce the new constant. That doesn't fit the criteria in the policy at Change records → .

I reviewed the comments and left suggestions and questions.