Added a row for specialty demos to the mockup.
darren oh → created an issue.
We have done what we can.
darren oh → created an issue.
This will need its own place to live, since it’s not a module. Should it be a separate project? I’d volunteer to create a repo for it in the Drupal Forge organization on GitHub, but first I need to hear what everyone else thinks.
I have attached three versions of the PNG and an SVG.
Removed section about building images with Docker Build because it is not relevant to images created by committing containers.
This is done. We are using a LiteLLM server at ai.drupalforge.org to generate $1 keys for demos.
darren oh → created an issue.
The patch in comment #21 is in 📌 Dialog + Media Library refinements to support Gin Active . No issue has been filed for it.
darren oh → created an issue.
darren oh → created an issue.
darren oh → created an issue.
This is due to a cron run that checks for available updates. Falling back to the parent mail method in the easy_email_override.mail_manager_decorator service when the theme hooks are not available would be more reliable than squashing the bug on a case by case basis.
darren oh → created an issue.
darren oh → created an issue.
A module could alter the XSS tag list to make it more secure, so the security concern is not relevant to the solution that is being proposed.
Comment #34 is long out of date. What we are doing now is allowing the XSS tag list to be altered by modules.
darren oh → made their first commit to this issue’s fork.
This is being worked on.
darren oh → created an issue.
nicxvan → credited darren oh → .
darren oh → created an issue.
darren oh → created an issue.
I don’t think a comment should be considered a contribution subject to the AI policy. I’m not worried about people using AI to express themselves or to improve the tone of their comments. It would only be spam if AI were used to increase the volume of comments rather than to improve their quality.
The CWG and DA have not put together a position on this. The Google doc will serve as a starting point. I will pass it on to the CWG to polish up and turn over to the DA.
I apologize for not updating this issue after the last CWG meeting. We did discuss it, and have action items to set up accounts on alternative platforms and put notices on the old platforms about where to find updates. I think the next steps would be to draft an official policy on selecting communication platforms, and create reports on which platforms we do and do not consider to be safe and reliable. I have created a public Google Doc so the participants in this issue can directly engage in the drafting process. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1E6lEx7wbk5xGDC_eImiPHPAxAevApfrafMo6...
I would like to help maintain this project. I have already created a browser extension → to make it work with Drupal Forge and am currently working on enhancements.
darren oh → created an issue.
Fixed capitalization of Ops Association.
I remember the vetting process. I would not want to bring the previous vetting process back. I think an open vetting process would prevent a backlog from forming. The important thing is for vetted status to be revokable.
I started the Drupal Forge → project to design a marketplace for site templates that rewards collaboration and contribution. Drupal Forge is very close to being a functional marketplace. I would be happy for the Drupal Association to use our work to build an official marketplace for the Drupal community. I hope the Drupal Association adopts the principles we have followed to build Drupal Forge.
- Sellers should be allowed to sell any templates, not just templates they contribute.
- Template contributors should decide who are the featured sellers for their templates.
- We do not sell the right to use templates, but actual functional sites that generate recurring revenue for sellers and contributors.
darren oh → created an issue.
In case anyone else was confused, I proposed that vetted contributors could lose their vetted status.
I propose we reconsider deprecating sandbox projects in light of the use of AI to abuse the system.
- Non-vetted contributors should only be allowed to create sandbox projects.
- A sandbox project should only be promoted to a full project by a vetted contributor.
- A contributor who creates a release without reviewing it should be given a warning.
- A contributor who creates a release without reviewing it after being warned should lose vetted status for a year.
See 📌 Bulk LLM-generated module publishing by bigbabert Active for an example of a contributor using AI to abuse the system multiple times.
Added automatic update and testing tasks.
I propose we reconsider deprecating sandbox projects in light of the use of AI to abuse the system.
- Non-vetted contributors would only be allowed to create sandbox projects.
- A sandbox project could only be promoted to a full project by a vetted contributor.
- A contributor who released a project without reviewing it would lose vetted status for a year.
There is no problem with publishing modules that are not functional as starting points for community contribution. I believe that is what sandbox projects are for. We used to require all projects to start in a sandbox and go through review before becoming a regular project. Now that AI has made it easier for people to create projects we should go back to that process.
Move this page to second from end.
Added a reminder to include project membership in this guide.
Improved grammar, added advise to ask for pay.
Not sure why you think everything else is passing. The 11.x branch is failing. Fixing all the failures that are already in the branch is outside the scope of this issue.
Code quality hasn't changed, which means test failures are not caused by this change.
darren oh → created an issue.
darren oh → created an issue.
darren oh → created an issue.
damienmckenna → credited darren oh → .
darren oh → created an issue.
This is available now at https://www.drupalforge.org/template/drupal-cms-xb
A note about costs: We use Digital Ocean to host demos. Due to the resources required for acceptable performance, we can only run three XB demos on a single Digital Ocean droplet. Each droplet costs $96 per month. We have reduced our standard demo time from six hours to one hour to control costs. Once a Digital Ocean droplet fills up with running demos, new demos take extra long to spin up because a new droplet has to be provisioned. We are working on ways to optimize the process without adding too much to costs.
You can help cover the cost of running the demos by donating at https://opencollective.com/drupalforge.
darren oh → created an issue.
darren oh → created an issue.
volkswagenchick → credited darren oh → .