[entityreference_view_widget] Entity Reference View Widget

https://www.drupal.org/node/2446505#comment-9691519 indicates that for Drupal 8 the module might be deprecated in favor of Entity Browser.

Thanks for the info bojanz. Well ... if that's the case then, I would recommend that somebody with the proper rights will put this on the project page. Regarding the ongoing D8 adaption campaign and the hard work invested in that by many at the moment, it would be really helpful to keep project pages up and not becoming orphaned or holding back missing informations for users regarding how to go on when a project is potentually deprecated ...

https://www.drupal.org/project/entity_browser

Errm, well, no this is not the proper way @mmjvb. A Drupal 8 Contrib Porting Tracker Issue cannot be the duplicate of another project. And if(!) a module is deprecated in favour of another should be confirmed by all maintainers of both modules.

BTW and FYI: I found reasons to see both modules in different use case corners. This should be really discussed a lil bit. And the linked comment, which was mentioned by bojanz states:

Hi, I started to work on it and I stopped because the maintainer of https://www.drupal.org/project/entity_browser contacted me to join our efforts but I actually never had a chance to contribute to it, so feel free to check there and see if it actually works.

... which indicates for me rather that this is not clear enough actually.

This project clearly states:

Closed (duplicate) = Project has been renamed or made obsolete by another project.

Which is what Bojanz suggested almost 2 years ago. You requested to make the actual status clear on the project page, setting the Status as intended actually does that. Contrary to what you changed it to!

Interesting that you mention:

And if(!) a module is deprecated in favour of another should be confirmed by all maintainers of both modules.

Where does that come from? Haven't seen that before, where is that documented?

Surely, a maintainer providing a port will make that clear on the project page, regardless what is reported here!

You also mention an ongoing D8 adoption campaign, where can I find information about that?

This project clearly states: Closed (duplicate) = Project has been renamed or made obsolete by another project.

Can you show me where the project (link to project page) states that?

Which is what Bojanz suggested almost 2 years ago. You requested to make the actual status clear on the project page, setting the Status as intended actually does that.

Is here a misunderstanding on your or my side about what you mean? A status of an issue is a status of an issue on its own regardless of from which project. And the issue "status" refers to the issue itself, not to the project. That's what I know so far. Not sure what you are referring to. Descriptions of the Priority and Status values can be found in the Issue queue handbook. Under duplicate it states clearly: "An identical, or strikingly similar issue has already been created." There is nothing about the project itself...

Where does that come from? Haven't seen that before, where is that documented?

Hm. Are you serious? Nobody else can change a project state on the project page than maintainers with the proper rights to do it, or additional administrators of D.O. to abandon orphaned or forgotten/unmaintained projects. And it requires no documentation to agree on, that maintainers should sit on the table when modules and their progress regarding merging or marking as duplicate will be discussed. Don't you think so? And there are issue cues regarding this topic (from what I remember), where you can ask for marking projects as whatever and others will look over it.

You also mention an ongoing D8 adoption campaign, where can I find information about that?

Well it depends on your media. If you follow Drupal and core maintainers or promoters in their issus or on Twitter, Google+, Facebook. It depends. The first Google search I did a minute ago brought me to: https://twitter.com/webchick/status/906192724566564864 but there are surely more.

I am not sure what the intension was of your comment after mine, but I also stated corrected myself clearly that I think it is overhasty to mark anything as duplicate here anyway.

Suggest you visit the project page of this project: https://www.drupal.org/project/contrib_tracker

See https://www.drupal.org/project/contrib_tracker#special for the meaning of Status for issues of THIS project.

And YES, the information on the project is effected by the Status of the issue in THIS project. The blue box on the project page about the port to D8 is depending on the status of its issue in THIS project. The information in its issue is not under control of the maintainer.

The media I use is d.o., would have expected a campaign to be mentioned there.

The intention of my reply was to let you know I disagree with you and ask you for further information.
My conclusion for now is that you haven't got a clue about this project and confusing things based on what you think to know about issues in the module queues. Agree with you that the current information is misleading, hence I changed the Status according to the rules for this project.
Clearly, there is no intention to port this, Status Duplicate reflects that. You can check the effect of the Status yourself.

Once you are aware of your misunderstanding concerning this issue you can change its Status. Won't be wasting my time any further!

The way you have used "The project states clearly" was misunderstandable and has indicated for me, that it has been already stated on the project page (before any status change of this issue here). I was worrying of the chance that I have overseen it before my initial comment. That has confused me and that was why I was asking for where this came from genuinly.

These issues have a different meaning or effect regarding a project than normal issues, yes, I mixed it up here in the rush for a moment with normal project issues in my explanation but this was not my main point. I guessed it already :) That's why I asked if the misunderstanding is on my or on your side. Btw: I am not tender about phrasings in discussions, but this could have been clarified easely without phrasings like "waste my time" since I was only talking about it accidently while you make such errors on other issues as I have seen and corrected for you already (Support vs Feature request). And since all the effort of users here is for helping, I don't see a more "waste of time" on any of us. And your conclusion regarding me is a little bit overhasty (but ok for me, it's your lack of knowledge) ;-) and, I would kindly ask you to step down a little bit regarding this kind of phrasings this way before you know people better.

And despite of all that obfuscation: Finally I still think you have rushed too much with the Close(duplicate) Status for this project, no matter what we discuss about here. I still believe that changing this project to Status closed(duplicate) should be really discussed with code contributors of both projects. Maybe it was a mistake to start this by asking for an information to put on the project page, but I was not after closing it before it has been discussed. I was rather after letting know about the possible chance it could happen, like bojanz kindly did with his comment. Maybe this way it is clearer for you.

The media I use is d.o., would have expected a campaign to be mentioned there.

Well there are surely posts regarding this on D.O. but a) It's not forced to be on D.O and b) I think it's not my job to search for them for you. I just wanted to make sure that you don't miss the point of me saying that there is an ongoing effort for Drupal 8 adaption which we all should help with by checking important contrib modules. There is nothing wrong with it.

Noticed your correction in the other issue. That is an issue in a module project and according to the documentation you referred to it can't be a support request nor feature request. But consider that nitpicking, the important part is not closing it. Consider replacing v5.1 with v5.2 the right thing to do. You didn't address that and your remark didn't make sense to me. My conclusion there is also that you have no clue about the issue and I won't waste my time. I'll refrain from those changes in the future.

For this issue, I mentioned "you can change its Status", meaning I'll leave it up to you. Won't be wasting my time by arguing and repeatedly changing the Status. It is fine to have different opinions.

Concerning D8 adaption campaign, thanks for your elaborate and comprehensive answer, really helpful. Sarcasm intended!

Wow ... @mmjvb: Do I misread your words? If not, please, stop that insulting and arrogant way talking to a long term contributor of the Drupal project. I don't know if you are aware of your tone (If I misread it, consider the matter closed).

After reading how this issue here evolved I became curious and took some minutes to check the surroundings. You are registered about a year+ and have rushed a lot over other issues lately to change statuses or commented on issues without going any deeper into the modules itself nor without providing patches or being code contributor or module maintainer nor with any correspondance or mentoring with/by long term contributors to the Drupal project, is this correct? No offense. But do you know that this feels very destructiv and deceptive in combination with such threads like this here, where you try to state that only "you have clue"?

While we should encourage new Drupal.org members to help in the issue queues we also should consider and advice to do it without searching for early confrontations. Like you, I am also very new here compared to diqidoq, who is an Open Source project contributor for over 10 years (not only for Drupal, Debian, etc and also with his companies), so my opinion maybe doesn't count much or is biased by the things I know from him. But the way you handle this situation is unbalanced from what I read. You miss to address many things in issues where you go to change the issue status but you blame @diqidoq not to go deeper into a small minor issue, where he has only corrected your wrongly set issue status? Apart from that you attack a long term contributor to the Drupal project because of a nitpick, who even holds a record in solving half of 700 issues in only a month for a module, which needed to be prepared to get into core in the D7 development beta cycle by saying that he "has no clue"? LOL ... Can't you imagine that he has mistakenly mixed issues while he works on several code issues? Do you know how often this even happens to leading core contributors in the rush? He often contributed completely selfless after core maintainers have asked around for help. He is very helpful, kind in the chat and mentoring others whenever possible and deserves a more mutual respectul treatment than yours, only because of you feeling stepped on your toes. I would kindly suggest to turn this way down. Your sarcasm is completely out of place and your ignorance and passing judgement regarding others unacceptable, sorry.

according to the documentation you referred to it can't be a support request nor feature request.

Hm? To add the library is a feature request, it doesn't matter if it only needs an update nor which version nor if this is a arguable request or not. He only stated that the feature request (set by another long term Drupal contributor DamienMcKenna) status from before was much closer at what it actually is, than changing it to a support request, which makes absolutley no sense. And that's what you try to wipe away here.

Consider replacing v5.1 with v5.2 the right thing to do. You didn't address that and your remark didn't make sense to me.

He absolutely addresses that by setting it back to feature request, because module maintainers sort issues to be fixed regarding their priorities and time table. And a support request can often be solved by other users without the need of a module maintainer to chime in. diqidoq knows that because he is a module maintainer. ;-) And by the way, he explained his decision quite well...

For this issue, I mentioned "you can change its Status", meaning I'll leave it up to you.

FYI: Another LOL ..., Thanks for allowing this ... Nobody is in the position to allow or forbid anyhting here, so your statement is absolutly pointless.

Won't be wasting my time by arguing and repeatedly changing the Status.

Yeah, but you waste the time of others by your emotional attacks and btw, nobody is intended to change statuses all the time here or somewhere else back and forth. Because nobody has time for this. Especially not the module maintainers and core contributors... But thanks for clarifying repeatly the worth of your time.

Concerning D8 adaption campaign, thanks for your elaborate and comprehensive answer, really helpful. Sarcasm intended!

What can I say ... no words required... This reads outrageous, provokating and trolling ...

Given that:

• Entity Browser covers the use case of this module as per its documentation.
• There's no evidence that corner cases for this module are missing.
• If there are any missing use cases, they can be added as new features to Entity Browser.
• There are no plans to port this module.
• Nobody has started working on it.
• The back and forth above neither moves the issue forward, nor adds any useful information.

...I'm changing the status here which will effectively deprecate this module in favour of Entity Browser for Drupal 8.

If anyone can provide any evidence to the contrary, please reopen.

It does seem like #2174633: View output is not used for entityreference options could be useful in some cases, thereby not requiring Entity Browser, but that hasn't landed yet. And even when it does, it's only for one specific use case (I think).

So for now, I'll be stating that this module was replaced by Entity Browser in Drupal 8 as part of my work on Upgrade Status. (See #303588: Show suggested replacement for obsolete modules for details.) If that core patch lands, we can open an issue there changing the status to "In core", and adding a note stating that Entity Browser can be used for other use cases.