- Issue created by @narendraR
- First commit to issue fork.
- Status changed to Needs review
11 months ago 10:38pm 7 May 2024 - Status changed to Needs work
11 months ago 1:17pm 8 May 2024 - ๐บ๐ธUnited States carsoncho Kansas City, MO
This all looks correct to me. Config inspector is reporting this at 100% now. Is the reason this is back to Needs work because of the pipelines failing?
- Status changed to Needs review
11 months ago 7:22am 13 May 2024 - Status changed to RTBC
11 months ago 5:46pm 14 May 2024 - ๐บ๐ธUnited States smustgrave
So applied the MR locally.
Update hook ran just fine
I'm still able to update the settings without issue
The proposed schema changes believe make sense.
+1 from me.
- Status changed to Needs work
11 months ago 9:22am 24 May 2024 - ๐ณ๐ฟNew Zealand quietone
I read the IS and the MR. There are new methods in the MR that should be documented.
- Status changed to Needs review
11 months ago 1:47pm 28 May 2024 - ๐บ๐ธUnited States carsoncho Kansas City, MO
I've added docblock info for those new methods. Ready for review.
- Status changed to Needs work
11 months ago 2:27pm 28 May 2024 The Needs Review Queue Bot โ 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 โ to find step-by-step guides for working with issues.
- Status changed to Needs review
11 months ago 3:48pm 28 May 2024 - ๐บ๐ธUnited States mikelutz Michigan, USA
Fixed coding standards and rebased to see if the validation checker can resolve updated dependencies.
- Status changed to RTBC
10 months ago 4:47pm 3 June 2024 - Status changed to Needs work
10 months ago 12:28pm 12 June 2024 - ๐ฌ๐งUnited Kingdom alexpott ๐ช๐บ๐
I've added some comments to the MR and 1 that I think should have a follow up created for.
- ๐ง๐ชBelgium borisson_ Mechelen, ๐ง๐ช
Followup created: ๐ Add PHP_INT_MAX to integer schema configuration Active
- Status changed to Needs review
9 months ago 9:45am 2 July 2024 - ๐ฎ๐ณIndia narendraR Jaipur, India
- Status changed to RTBC
9 months ago 8:25am 4 July 2024 - Status changed to Needs work
9 months ago 8:37am 4 July 2024 - ๐ฌ๐งUnited Kingdom alexpott ๐ช๐บ๐
removing the UUID constraint feels like a step in the wrong direction. NULL is never really a valid value for site UUID.
- ๐บ๐ธUnited States phenaproxima Massachusetts
Thanks, @narendraR; that makes sense.
However, I agree with @alexpott that NULL is never valid for the site UUID, and so it shouldn't be nullable.
- ๐ฌ๐งUnited Kingdom alexpott ๐ช๐บ๐
I think this issue points to us needing a new constraint which is something like NotBlankAfterInstall - so a very can be blank during site install but once the site is up and running it can not be. This is true for uuid, name and email.
I also think that none of these should be nullable. PHP 8 makes swapping between NULLs and strings hard.
- ๐ฎ๐ณIndia narendraR Jaipur, India
@alexpott, I tried to create a new constraint as suggested in #23. But I don't understand how to bypass existing
NotNullConstraint
for UUID. https://git.drupalcode.org/project/drupal/-/merge_requests/7723/diffs?commit_id=4fcb5099b2b23f22643948c901321db04b89b0db#4d658554b6066a85600dfbe03dc34c3003f8a3e1_0_32 - ๐ง๐ชBelgium borisson_ Mechelen, ๐ง๐ช
I don't understand having to bypass NotNullConstraint? I think we have to reimplement it in here?
We should probably start with a reroll here.
- First commit to issue fork.
- ๐ณ๐ฑNetherlands bbrala Netherlands
Rebased thsi issue.
@alexpott
> I think this issue points to us needing a new constraint which is something like NotBlankAfterInstall - so a very can be blank during site install but once the site is up and running it can not be. This is true for uuid, name and email.
You say this, which is kinda the same problem as ๐ Add validation constraints to contact.form.* Needs work comment #32. There it is a recipe which wants to use mail to replace a value, which is doesn't get since mail is not yet in config when installing from a recipe with the drupal command.
So there is also some sort of 'during install' issue, where during an install is appearantly possible to have invalid config.
Perhaps we even need to fix it ealier? Although i don't really feal like ignoring validation for config while installing is a good idea. Since it is pretty valuable, what if you are to install some sort of Drupal implementation (like a decoupled Drupal) and it comes with invalid config, would we want to ignore that?