Offering to co-maintain ckeditor

As someone who is using CKEditor in several critical projects, I am interested in the module being responsibly maintained. I see there is some backlog in the issue queue, but I have not experienced any of the problems reported. I may just have been lucky, or they may have been submitted by users that has misconfigured CKEditor (it took me a while to get it right, but that was my own fault).

To me, this does not inspire confidence. For somebody to take charge of a module with so many users (352314 reported installs), I would have expected to see several patches posted to the issue queue that had been voted RTBC by several independent users of the module. Instead, the issues I see submitted by you are poorly documented, and usually not accompanied with a patch that will allow the community to evaluate your ability to take care of this module.

hass, it was not my intention to disparage you.

However, I do not share your evaluation of CKeditor contrib ("unmaintainable mess"), and the customary route to becoming a co-maintainer of a module is to post patches, and to get them reviewed and tested by the community.

But if you feel that patching the present module is not worth your time, and that dramatic cleanup or even a rewrite from scratch is what is necessary, then I think your time will be better spent on creating a fork.

While the Drupal community prefer collaboration over competition, collaboration is IMHO is not a productive arrangement when there is little overlap between the project owner's and the co-maintainer's views on architecture and future direction of a project.

Other WYSIWYG editor projects are already hosted on Drupal.org. In this case, I think it would be better if you went ahead and created your own.

As for Drupal 8, the CKEditor team works directly with the Drupal 8 core team to make CKEditor part of the Drupal 8 core. I think it would be a waste of time to create a 7.x-2.x branch of the CKEditor contrib to "bring it more inline with D8", but this is just my opinion.

Given the number of number of commits by the project owner and the company affiliation and the work they put into bringing CKE into D8 core we can safely assume that a full ownership transfer won't happen (and the module does not qualify as abandoned). But I totally would love to see an effort to improve the D7 branch.

I've contacted the project owner and pointed him to this issue. If there is no response within two weeks please set this issue back to active.

Thanks @dddave for a PM.

As a module maintainer I wanted to write that I will support any initiative that will lead to a better, stable version of a module that will provide users at least a similar painless installation procedure and at least a similar flexibility and ease of use regarding setting configuration options.

What hass wrote is true in many points, part of it is caused by the fact that the module has evolved for many years and has not been heavily refactored since then.

@hass - I'll send you a PM within 1-2 hours to discuss in details your proposal.

Glad I was able to facilitate things. Reading this issue again I might have a case of the Mondays. Not my sharpest moment not noticing that the issue title clearly calls for a co-maintainership.

However I am happy to see progress here and anything that needs to happen should and can be done by @wwalc.