- Status changed to RTBC
almost 2 years ago 2:22pm 27 January 2023 - 🇩🇪Germany Svitlana
I tested on drupal 10 and it works fine. MR looks also good.
- 🇺🇸United States pcate
+1 RTBC. The patch applied cleanly and fixed all D10 compatibility issues.
-
NickDickinsonWilde →
committed 097f680b on 3.0.x
Issue #3312561 by johnpicozzi, dvym, jcnventura: Drupal 10 Compatibility...
-
NickDickinsonWilde →
committed 097f680b on 3.0.x
- Issue was unassigned.
- Status changed to Fixed
over 1 year ago 7:49pm 28 March 2023 - 🇨🇦Canada nickdickinsonwilde Victoria, BC (T'So-uke lands)
Thanks y'all. Merged into a new branch (3.0.x). Will have a release out later today
- leymannx Berlin
The new branch name is wrong. It needs to be 3.x-dev. With 3.0.x-dev you would be able to only have patch version releases.
- 🇨🇦Canada nickdickinsonwilde Victoria, BC (T'So-uke lands)
Per https://www.drupal.org/node/3108648 → either form is acceptable. One of the biggest audience Drupal modules - Webform → also uses #.#.x branches (aside, I think 6.1.x to 6.2.x should've gone to 7.0.x instead because removing supported core versions is a BC change that should be a Major version not a minor version but not really relevant).
Do you have some documentation/other projects that make you think there is a significant standardization around #.x branches for contrib modules? Drupal core goes for #.#.x branches - definitely, core has a lot more patch releases with no new features than most modules. Eh I can see your point after writing all that out. hah. Thanks for the thought. Given the velocity of this project I'm not really concerned - but will think about it for other modules for sure.
Automatically closed - issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.