- Issue created by @mortona2k
- πΏπ¦South Africa rudolfbyker South Africa
I'm not sure if I should answer at https://www.drupal.org/project/auto_config_form/issues/3518655 π± Compare with Schema Based Config Forms module Active or at https://www.drupal.org/project/schema_based_config_forms/issues/3518654 π± Compare with Automatic Configuration Form module Active , so I'll do both. :)
I'm more than happy to collaborate. Mine is older, but his looks more feature-rich. I think my module's name (Automatic Configuration Form) is more discoverable, and his module's name (Schema Based Config Forms) is more technically correct (although it should be Schema-based Config Forms to be grammatically correct). So if we merge, I'm not sure under which name we should continue.
Comparison of usage:
- πΏπ¦South Africa rudolfbyker South Africa
@murz should be made aware of this issue, since he has been developing new features for
auto_config_form
recently. - π¦π²Armenia murz Yerevan, Armenia
I made a comparison of both modules, both of them are great! They solve the same challenge from slightly different sides, and very similar.
But I got an idea about going wider and implementing schema-based forms not only for configuration objects, but for any data structure in Drupal, that required the rework of the idea from scratch.
Therefore, I decided to start a new separate project with a more general approach: Scheme Form β - please check it out, and if you like the idea - you can join the development too!
- πΏπ¦South Africa rudolfbyker South Africa
Responded at https://www.drupal.org/project/schema_based_config_forms/issues/3518654#... π± Compare with Automatic Configuration Form module Active