There are a bunch of bugs to do with differences between Simplenews 1.x and 2.x:

- code that supports 1.x and does nothing on 2.x so needs updating
- code that supports 2.x and causes 1.x to break
- code that supports 1.x and causes 2.x to break

#1585712: changes to node form for newsletter templates have no effect with Simplenews 2.x
#1570062: SIMPLENEWS_COMMAND_SEND_NONE defined twice: incompatible with Simplenews 1.x?
#1581808: Cannot manually create new users with simplenews scheduler active

I am of the opinion that trying to properly support two different APIs for Simplenews (and form structures, and constants, etc etc) is more effort than it is worth and will make maintaining this already complex module much harder, and that therefore we should officially state that our 2.x branch is specifically for Simplenews 2.x.

If users of Simplenews 1.x want to use features from our 2.x branch, and are prepared to make backport patches from our 2.x branch, I would be prepared to commit them to our 1.x branch and make releases: minimal maintenance in other words.

What do the other maintainers think?

Comments

miro_dietiker’s picture

miro_dietiker
Location Switzerland
commented

Sounds feasible.

I would never expect a third party module to support simplenews 6.x-1.x and 6.x-2.x at the same time. The "anything-with-anything" approach is leading you to doom...

We've switched a lot of things for consistency reasons and i've stopped trying to fix stuff un 6.x-1.x because it needed the restructuration that happened in 6.x-2.x to solve it. You'll result in the same situation. It's long ago that we've encouraged everyone to upgrade and 6.x-2.x is the supported major branch.

I don't think it's worth putting time in 6.-1.x ... we can create a lot more value if we focus on one combination that rocks.

joachim’s picture

joachim commented

> I would never expect a third party module to support simplenews 6.x-1.x and 6.x-2.x at the same time

Well as you're the Simplenews maintainer, that's a pretty strong argument for dropping 1.x support.

I've sent dgtlmoon an email, as I'd like to get his opinion before moving on this.

dgtlmoon’s picture

dgtlmoon commented
Status: Active » Fixed

Yes, I agree don't support 1.x anymore, as the 1.x is only bug fixes from what I can see.

However I'm still open to testing/comitting patches on the 1.x branch if people supply them

Status: Fixed » Closed (fixed)

Automatically closed -- issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.

joachim’s picture

joachim commented
Component: Code » Documentation
Assigned: Unassigned » dgtlmoon
Status: Closed (fixed) » Active

I don't have access to edit the project page - dgtlmoon, could you add something about how 6.x-2.x requires Simplenews 6.x-2.x to the project page please?

I've added a note about this to the README too.

dgtlmoon’s picture

dgtlmoon commented

joachim - i've upped your access, can you update it now?

joachim’s picture

joachim commented
Status: Active » Fixed

Yup. Done.

Status: Fixed » Closed (fixed)

Automatically closed -- issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.

Anonymous’s picture

(not verified) commented
Issue summary: View changes

blah