Do not use SERVER_NAME as default value for the site name

Thanks, nicoloye.

If I'm not mistaken, drush si defaults to "Site-install" so we should be fine there. But you're right, we do need to check.

Patch looks good, thanks! But what's the reason to not remove minimal.profile? I'm marking it 'needs work' because as far as I know, there is no reason to leave it there.

Thanks. The automated test has not finished yet, but seen from the UI, the patch works perfectly. See the before & after screenshots.

Unfortunately, now that minimal.profile is gone, drush si no longer works:

$ drush si
You are about to DROP all tables in your 'drupaltest' database. Do you want to continue? (y/n): y
Starting Drupal installation. This takes a while. Consider using the --notify global option.                         [ok]
exception 'Drupal\Core\Installer\Exception\InstallerException' with message 'Required modules: Required modules not  [error]
found.

The following modules are required but were not found. Move them into the appropriate modules subdirectory, such as
<em>/modules</em>. Missing modules: <span class="admin-missing">Minimal</span>' in
/home/marc/http/public/drupal/core/includes/install.core.inc:2268
Stack trace:
#0 /home/marc/http/public/drupal/core/includes/install.core.inc(1010): install_display_requirements(Array, Array)
#1 /home/marc/http/public/drupal/core/includes/install.core.inc(644): install_verify_requirements(Array)
#2 /home/marc/http/public/drupal/core/includes/install.core.inc(522): install_run_task(Array, Array)
#3 /home/marc/http/public/drupal/core/includes/install.core.inc(117): install_run_tasks(Array)
#4 /home/marc/.composer/vendor/drush/drush/includes/drush.inc(709):
install_drupal(Object(Composer\Autoload\ClassLoader), Array)
#5 /home/marc/.composer/vendor/drush/drush/includes/drush.inc(694): drush_call_user_func_array('install_drupal',
Array)
#6 /home/marc/.composer/vendor/drush/drush/commands/core/drupal/site_install.inc(78): drush_op('install_drupal',
Object(Composer\Autoload\ClassLoader), Array)
#7 /home/marc/.composer/vendor/drush/drush/commands/core/site_install.drush.inc(289):
drush_core_site_install_version(NULL, Array)
#8 [internal function]: drush_core_site_install()
#9 /home/marc/.composer/vendor/drush/drush/includes/command.inc(368): call_user_func_array('drush_core_site...',
Array)
#10 /home/marc/.composer/vendor/drush/drush/includes/command.inc(219): _drush_invoke_hooks(Array, Array)
#11 [internal function]: drush_command()
#12 /home/marc/.composer/vendor/drush/drush/includes/command.inc(187): call_user_func_array('drush_command', Array)
#13 /home/marc/.composer/vendor/drush/drush/lib/Drush/Boot/BaseBoot.php(62): drush_dispatch(Array)
#14 /home/marc/.composer/vendor/drush/drush/drush.php(70): Drush\Boot\BaseBoot->bootstrap_and_dispatch()
#15 /home/marc/.composer/vendor/drush/drush/drush.php(11): drush_main()
#16 {main}

Since it works in the UI, and module files are no longer required in Drupal 8, I'd guess that this is a problem in Drush. Perhaps we should contact the drush maintainers and see if they have an opinion about it.

Yes, I just found the change notice too: .module and .profile files are no longer required; ModuleHandler::getModuleList() now returns Extension objects. That title is pretty clear :-)

Given the fact that this does not occur in the graphical installer, I suppose there is a hard-coded yet incorrect assumption in drush somewhere.

Ha, it get's even weirder. I did some more testing and I noticed that drush si, which installs the standard profile, gives the error I posted in #12. However if you install the minimal profile with drush si minimal, it works flawlessly. Go figure.

From the UI, both standard and minimal work fine.

I created an issue against Drush, drush site-install breaks if minimal.profile is not present, regarding the drush si problem.

update:
It looks like we're getting closer to finding the cause of the drush si problem. It seems to be a Drush problem indeed.

As far as I'm concerned, this patch is be RTBC, but it would be nicer to wait until Drush is ready for this. Also, we could use a usability review, as emma.maria already indicated with the tag.

I have verified that Greg's commit to Drush solves the drush si problem, so that should no longer block this issue.

Thanks for the UX review, Yoroy.

So far I only looked at this form from the "Can inexperienced users understand this?" angle. But you're completely right, the question "How much work is it to complete this task?" is very important too. For more experienced users, the second question is probably more important than the first.

On the other hand, choosing a site name is something you have to do anyway. I think it's more efficient to spend a couple of seconds and do it right there on the install form, than to go to Home > Administration > Configuration > System later - assuming that the user even knows where to find that form.

IMO (not a UX expert, but not a newbie either) default values only make sense if that is the correct value for the majority of users. In this case, there is no way that Drupal can guess the correct value, so a default value wouldn't be helpful.

How about adding a placeholder attribute to the site name field?

Yoroy, sorry for the choice of words, I agree. It's just too easy to use "awesome" in every sentence about Drupal :-)

Nicoloye, I would rather have a form that looks a bit empty than a form that looks cluttered. The placeholder does serve a purpose in this case (an example of the value the user is expected to enter), but that doesn't mean that every field needs one. For instance, I don't think people need an example of an email address these days.

I rolled a new patch because the code was perfect, but the inline docs were not updated.

Screenshot of the form with placeholder:

Thanks yoroy, let's use 'My site'. New patch attached.

Just for the record: Discussing this in IRC, we arrived at the conclusion that using the word "Drupal" would probably be allowed in this specific case, because the core .profile files are like distributions themselves, and the code will not be inherited by other distributions. That said, having "Drupal" in the placeholder is not necessary, so let's not go there.

@webchick, that thought did cross my mind, but then I figured that the "Minimal" profile must have minimal configuration, but not necessarily minimal usability. You could argue though that "Minimal" should have minimal code, and therefore the placeholder (and, as a consequence, the entire minimal.profile file) doesn't belong there.

OK, so that makes a great novice task for someone in LA :-)
(If no one takes it I'll find some time myself soon.)

We need a new patch that combines:
- the removal of minimal.profile, just like the patch in #10 did;
- the change to standard.profile as proposed in the patch in #39.