Support for Drupal 7 is ending on 5 January 2025—it’s time to migrate to Drupal 10! Learn about the many benefits of Drupal 10 and find migration tools in our resource center.
In the initial CMI patch, the following config files were created for the image module
image.styles.large.xml
image.styles.medium.xml
image.styles.small.xml
These should really be changed to singular (aka style instead of styles.) To do this the following has to happen:
- The files need to be renamed
- Anywhere in code that references 'image.styles.*' needs to be changed to 'image.style.*'
Comment | File | Size | Author |
---|---|---|---|
#9 | 1479652-09.patch | 2.59 KB | jhedstrom |
#1 | 1479652-1.patch | 3.42 KB | Psikik |
Comments
Comment #1
Psikik CreditAttribution: Psikik commentedFirst go at a patch. Renames the files and changes all instances of image.styles in image.module to image.style when using the new config system.
Comment #2
Psikik CreditAttribution: Psikik commentedForgot to set status.
Comment #3
gddThis is perfect! Tests pass, I ran it locally a bit and everything checks out. Thanks!
Comment #4
Dries CreditAttribution: Dries commentedNice little clean-up. Committed to 8.x.
Comment #5
aspilicious CreditAttribution: aspilicious commentedI think you forgot to add the new files?
Comment #6
moshe weitzman CreditAttribution: moshe weitzman commentedWe wouldn't forget to add files if folks used format-patch instead of patch. And folks would get proper attribution. We have documented the process at http://drupal.org/node/1054616. I think that should be the default. Another huge advantage is that patches will apply much more often even when underlying code has changed since git knows the ancestry when the patch was rolled and can be more aggressive in applying.
Comment #7
jhodgdonI reverted the commit above because it was missing files. Back to RTBC.
Comment #8
Dries CreditAttribution: Dries commentedCommitted to 8.x. Sorry about missing those files.
Comment #9
jhedstromLooks like the old files are still there. Patch removes them.
Comment #11
jhedstromHmm, doesn't look like the patch from #1 was actually committed?
Comment #12
jhedstromSetting this back to RTBC. It looks like the original patch was reverted, and then only the new files were added, without the necessary code changes.
Comment #13
catchOK this should be fixed now, I got confused between what needed to be added vs. deleted, so the git history is a bit of a mess now (took three commits to get straight), but code should be in the right state afaik.