Heads up about a new module: Config Shard

Created on 28 August 2025, about 1 month ago

Hey there, just wanted to give you a heads up that I've created a new module that uses this one as an inspiration but instead of overriding the config storage service uses the config transformer API instead. I've pushed it to a sandbox for now: https://www.drupal.org/sandbox/tstoeckler/3541903 β†’

I would like to publish it as a full module with the config_shard namespace, but wanted to see if you have any input, thoughts, etc. Of course, any collaboration would be very much welcome, too.

Thanks!

🌱 Plan
Status

Active

Version

1.0

Component

Code

Created by

πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺGermany tstoeckler Essen, Germany

Live updates comments and jobs are added and updated live.
Sign in to follow issues

Comments & Activities

  • Issue created by @tstoeckler
  • πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦Canada Charlie ChX Negyesi 🍁Canada

    You are now a maintainer of pax. Please open a new branch and submit the module into there. A better implementation is welcome. No need for a new project. The current pax implementation is not worth maintaining if there's a better solution.

  • πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺGermany tstoeckler Essen, Germany

    Awesome, thanks very much for the quick response!

    Just because I would regret not having asked: Are you married to the pax namespace? I just personally don't find it the most intuitive name (but maybe there's something I'm missing?), so I wouldn't mind just claiming the config_shard namespace anyway and then we can both be maintainers over there. But it's not a big deal either way and if you prefer staying here that's also totally fine and I will just open a new branch here.

  • πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦Canada Charlie ChX Negyesi 🍁Canada

    If you can make upgrade work feel free to sunset this module and recommend config_shard instead. Likely it needs two deployments, the first installs config_shard and the second removes pax. I can't see it working in a single step. This, of course, would require config_shard being able to read pax sharded config dirs. It's very likely the upgrade is just documentation.

    What I really want to avoid is having two modules for the same purpose especially when one is a dirty unmaintained hack. Which name they live under, I couldn't care less.

  • πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺGermany tstoeckler Essen, Germany

    Nice, yeah I will try that then. Yeah, sounds good, should be manageable regarding the update path πŸ‘οΈ

  • πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦Canada Charlie ChX Negyesi 🍁Canada

    Since I edited my comment above, let me repeat: it's very likely the upgrade is just documentation. It just needs to be written and tested -- manually. No need for a phpunit test for that. Thanks for modernizing this.

  • πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺGermany tstoeckler Essen, Germany

    Right, makes sense. No worries, thanks for the idea!

  • πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦Canada Charlie ChX Negyesi 🍁Canada

    Since this module won't see a D11 upgrade now and also it's quite hard to uninstall a module which has been removed, I asked in #contribute how to proceed and the best I got was to release a new version with a hook requirements message to note this is the last version. Could you release another D10 module here with that?

  • πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺGermany tstoeckler Essen, Germany

    Yes, that totally makes sense. Will do that!

Production build 0.71.5 2024