- ๐บ๐ธUnited States benjifisher Boston area
The CI tests passed, but just because the "Validatable config" test is allowed to fail.
TL;DR: I think it is worth looking at that test, but I think it is OK for it to fail for this issue.
I am not familiar with that test, but it seems to compare the results of
vendor/bin/drush config:inspect --statistics
on the target branch (11.x) and on the feature branch.
On the target branch, the installs
drush
and theconfig_inspector
module. Then it installs the Standard profile and enables all core modules (exceptsdc
, which is obsolete) andconfig_inspector
. On the feature branch, the test first applies database updates.The test fails if any of the statistics are lower on the feature branch than they are on the target branch.
I went through similar steps, but instead of
vendor/bin/drush config:inspect --statistics
, I exported configuration. The only difference between the two branches is that the feature branch includescore.base_field_override.node.article.promote.yml
. It looks as though this config entity is not fully validatable: the schema is incore/config/schema/core.data_types.schema.yml
, and it is not marked asFullyValidatable: ~
. So it makes sense that the statistics go down and the test fails. - ๐จ๐ฆCanada xmacinfo Canada
Thank you everyone!
Can we do a clean-up of the Issue tags? I think some of the tags are not relevant anymore.
- ๐บ๐ธUnited States smustgrave
Believe that was the last outstanding question.
- ๐ฎ๐ณIndia mohit_aghera Rajkot
Updated code to use the config updater service.
There were unrelated functional javascript test failures. Triggered the job again. - First commit to issue fork.
- ๐บ๐ธUnited States smustgrave
Yea I think we probably do need to batch it. Know it's not likely but I have worked with sites that had 100s of content types
- ๐บ๐ธUnited States smustgrave
Thank you for creating this issue to improve Drupal.
We are working to decide if this task is still relevant to a currently supported version of Drupal. There hasn't been any discussion here for over 8 years which suggests that this has either been implemented or is no longer relevant. Your thoughts on this will allow a decision to be made.
Since we need more information to move forward with this issue, the status is now Postponed (maintainer needs more info). If we don't receive additional information to help with the issue, it may be closed after three months.
Thanks!