- πΊπΈUnited States phenaproxima Massachusetts
chrisfromredfin β credited phenaproxima β .
- πΊπΈUnited States chrisfromredfin Portland, Maine
Added credit for Adam since this was an idea from him at NEDCamp 2022. And I think it's a great one, but would require additional module maintainer contributions, such as adding "now what" steps in the info.yml or to a known help file or something. core-post-mvp is perfect.
- πΊπΈUnited States yesct
I fixed some typos in the issue summary.
I added keywords like settings and link.
I also expanded the scope, by suggesting we link to the module config page.
Do folks think linking should be a separate issue?? Maybe it's not dependent on module maintaining writing text. And so linking might get implemented faster?
+1 for a solution to give instruction to the user once a recipe is applied.
I had this issue after installing the "Search" recipe on a fresh Drupal CMS install.
The installation works because the recipe's button now says "Installed" but - as a site builder - I have no idea what to do next.
Recipes should provide a way to display message and/or redirect the users to another page.
- πΊπΈUnited States phenaproxima Massachusetts
I think I see a path forward here: let recipes optionally define a set of follow-up tasks, which are then exposed in the Project Browser UI as items in a drop button.
Recipes would be able to have something like this in their recipe.yml -- a set of follow-up links:
follow_up: - text: Configure route_name: some_module.settings route_parameters: foo: bar options: query: hello: goodbye - # Another struct like the one above...
Astute readers will recognize that repeatable struct as being a dehydrated
\Drupal\Core\Link
object. So the recipe could define as many follow-up links as it wanted, in that format. Project Browser would then display those links in a drop-button, probably in the project detail modal, once the recipe was in the\Drupal\project_browser\ActivationStatus::Active
state.There are two blockers to this.
- Core needs to allow recipe.yml to contain a follow_up field. Rather than formalize that structure in core right now, I propose we simply relax the validation in
\Drupal\Core\Recipe\Recipe::parse()
so that recipes could have additional data to be exposed to specialist modules, like Project Browser. This would be a one-line change in core (excluding test coverage); no other validation constraints would change. - π Replace install/select button with a Drupal's action button Active would be the other blocker; we'd need the ability for a project to present a set of action links to the Svelte app, which then get rendered in a drop button.
Thoughts?
- Core needs to allow recipe.yml to contain a follow_up field. Rather than formalize that structure in core right now, I propose we simply relax the validation in
- πΊπΈUnited States phenaproxima Massachusetts
Postponed on β¨ Allow recipes to expose additional follow-up tasks to Project Browser Active , which is the overarching plan for implementing #10.
- πΊπΈUnited States phenaproxima Massachusetts
This is actually blocked by π [PP-2] Return activation data as its own JSON-serializable payload Postponed .
- πΊπΈUnited States phenaproxima Massachusetts
This is ready for an initial review. Probably needs test coverage, but that could be a kernel test covering ModuleActivator.
- πΊπΈUnited States phenaproxima Massachusetts
Test written, pretty straightforward.
- πΊπΈUnited States tim.plunkett Philadelphia
tim.plunkett β changed the visibility of the branch 3322601-pp-1-add-instructions to hidden.
- πΊπΈUnited States tim.plunkett Philadelphia
tim.plunkett β changed the visibility of the branch 3322601-pp-1-add-instructions to active.
-
chrisfromredfin β
committed 5fb1a6a8 on 2.0.x authored by
phenaproxima β
Issue #3322601 by phenaproxima, matthieuscarset, tim.plunkett,...
-
chrisfromredfin β
committed 5fb1a6a8 on 2.0.x authored by
phenaproxima β
- πΊπΈUnited States chrisfromredfin Portland, Maine
Thanks, all! For contributions great and small :)