[policy, no patch] Mark Package Manager as a beta stability core module

I think all that needs to happen here is that the RMs have to agree that beta stability requirements have been met, and then we update the documentation to match.

I assume the answer is no, but wanted to ask: I assume the rebranding of auto updates to “Update Manager” per 📌 [policy] Core module machine name and UI labeling for Automatic Updates Active and others doesn’t impact package_manager at all, right? There are no functions that might need renaming, correct?

Thanks,
-Derek

Correct.

Groovy, thanks.

Where might one review the list of beta blockers, outstanding stable blockers, etc?

🌱 Drupal 10 Core Roadmap for Automatic Updates Active is the main plan issue.

I'd personally be happier here if the issue summary on 🌱 Drupal 10 Core Roadmap for Automatic Updates Active was a bit clearer. I tried to re-organise it a bit this past week, but it's still hard to see what the stable blocking issues are or aren't, and some issues are open but still in the beta blockers list - I duplicated one to the stable list just now.

Reading https://www.drupal.org/project/drupal/issues/3319030 🌱 Drupal 10 Core Roadmap for Automatic Updates Active there appear to still be open issues under the beta section (if I'm reading that right) so shouldn't this be postponed on those being completed?

Well this issue includes discussing which of those issues are really beta vs. stable blocking, but yes we should have an accurate issue summary over there. Marking needs work for that I guess.

Updated that issue's summary, moving the TUF stuff to stable blocking.

So seems all beta blockers for package manager on the roadmap are done, so assuming this is good?

Sorry about the status wars, @smustgrave, but I think we still need review of the IS updates @catch requested for this to be RTBC.

I think we would need a lot more clarification/caveats for users about the signing and infra work being deferred to stable-blocking.

I have concerns with this sentence:

so it is now considered safe to rely on this module and build other projects on top of it

The only thing that is safe is the stability of the API. The packages are not actually being signed or validated. This seems misleading in a bad way. :)

The other thing is that Package Manager really does not correspond at all to normal expectations of a beta module (which generally means exposed to end users for testing within the application). The module is still marked hidden (and definitely should remain so!!).

An alternate course of action that I discussed with @phenaproxima in Slack is to avoid the confusing "What is beta really?" question that comes with wildly divergent expectations, and instead have a release note targeting developers something like:

The hidden, experimental Package Manager module allows Automatic Updates and Project Browser to be tested so that they can eventually be added to future versions of Drupal core. Package Manager is now considered API-stable, and future API changes will be backwards-compatible, so contributed module developers can now rely on its APIs.

(That with the appropriate things linked as per the 11.1.0 release notes.)

Or something, please feel free to propose improvements.

Updating title to include that alternate potential resolution. Are there also places that the decision that the API is stable should be documented in the PM codebase and/or the handbook?

Updating IS with a revision of #13 incorporating simpler language from the original release note.

@phenaproxima, are you okay with the alternative approach?