8.x-6.x Roadmap

Version 6 looks pretty different than 5 from a tooling standpoint. I see compass stuff is still in the STARTER theme and the docs are a little outdated. We should pull the plug on the old stuff to encourage a shift to the new (Gulp, etc). Compass is still in the STARTER theme, yet not mentioned on http://foundation.zurb.com/sites/docs/installation.html.

Could we get the new F6 logo updated on the project page?

Since 6.x is still tagged alpha, is there a chance to:

Gulp

• Review the current Gulp workflow
• Adapt Gulp workflow to be ready for Gulp 4.x best practices
• Implement a JS uglifier task
• Implement a browser sync task
• Implement a drush cr task if drush is present
• Add documentation for these tasks
• Provide guidelines on changing or adding on to tasks for your own needs (like SassDoc, or PNG Crusher task, etc)

Utility / Misc

• Add in a Drupal Console command to generate STARTER themes
• Deprecate the Drush command (functional, but, nothing new added)
• Update Foundation versions to latest releases
• Add in some basic Foundation layouts in preparation for Drupal 8.3.x
• Remove older tools like Compass/Ruby in favor of Gulp + Gulp SASS

In an ideal world I would love to see full feature parity between this project and the ZURB Template (https://github.com/zurb/foundation-zurb-template). This would keep the toolstack as uniform possible between projects making it easier to incorporate updates as newer version of Foundation are available. Modeling this projects source code based on ZURB Template's file organization would also make it much easier to migrate ZURB Template prototype code into Drupal.

--

ZURB Template Features that could be integrated:

- BrowserSync
- Uglify (js minification)
- WebPack (js bundling)
- Clean CSS (css minification)
- Sourcemaps (simplify in browser review of compiled css / js)
- Imagemin (image minifcation)
- Style Sherpa (style guide generator)

--

If this is goal that current maintainers are interested in pursuing I am happy to help out. I currently use a Yeoman generator that I developed to scaffold all of our themes that is built on ZURB Template (Foundation 6.3) however I would prefer to invest myself in this project to push things forward.

Cheers!

I have a question about the use of bower in the Theme root, and the STARTER kit.
I'm not sure why we use it.

1. bower has been put into maintenance mode.
2. the only 2 packages we need are :
   
   

       "foundation-sites": "~6.3.1",
       "motion-ui": "~1.2.2"
   

3. These 2 packages are available on the npm library :
   
   • https://www.npmjs.com/package/foundation-sites
   • https://www.npmjs.com/package/motion-ui

What about removing bower to move those 2 packages into the package.json ?

Thanks for your anwser.

@doostinharrell,

I would LOVE to see that as well. Keeping the tools similar would be a huge help.

@FlorisMoriceau I agree that Bower dependencies should be replaced with the NPM variant. It's also good to note that the latest version of the ZURB Template ships without the need for Bower.

https://github.com/zurb/foundation-zurb-template/commit/2706b837898c0d6c...

Hm between ditching bower and the pesky matter of src/layout code issues do we have to start another branch in order to cleanly manage these issues? It seems like a lot of breaking changes would be required on 8.x-6.x otherwise, hate to say it but yeah.

@doostinharrell, I opened a new issue to talk about removing bower, and commit a patch if needed.

Hong Pong, great to see you as a new co-maintainer! Your July suggestion in the IS seems very solid.

Zurb Foundation for sites is fast moving, here is their roadmap https://github.com/zurb/foundation-sites/wiki/Project-Roadmap

I would support any changes to the subtheme process (clone rather than inherit settings/templates), having multiple zurb versions (8.x-6.3 , 8.x-6.4, 8.x-7.0), stripping out CSS or any settings which would make it easier for us to keep track of the constantly moving library.

I think (but am not 100% sure) making the subthemes standalone would mean that we could make breaking changes constantly and they would only show when a new subtheme was created, without effecting the old theme.

Each major version was meant to match the major version of Foundation.

One thing I would like to see is deprecating the drush command in favor of a Drupal Console generator command. I think that would aide in subtheme creation.

Breaking changes are fine, we are still in Alpha so anyone using the theme should expect that change will be required.

Updating the project page with this information might be a way of highlighting this.

The library we use is solid but this theme is stalling with its current release schedule.

I agree with that and think we can increase the delivery speed by shedding the aging stuff like bower and drush, and consolidating it down to smaller form.

The dev version is getting quite far ahead of the current alpha. I cannot see any issues that have been caused by the dev, only improvements and bug fixes. I think we should roll the current dev as another release, alpha or beta.

Agreed, I will tag 8.x-6.0-alpha3 and 7.x-5.0-rc7 . The 7.x-5.x branch had more significant commits. Thanks for all your help on this serg2!

There are quite a few issues in the queue which are questions about documentation. I could create formal documentation for the theme, through from installation to customising Twig templates for zurbs markup. This will close off quite a few issues and help figure out what best practice actually is. I think I might need access rights to do this, either way, if someone can point me in the right direction.

Hey serg, I gave your account permission to edit the project and maintain issues - is that enough to edit documentation?

Let me know if you want commit access too to help out.

Thanks Kevin, that is fine for now. I found https://www.drupal.org/node/1928104 so I think it is best if I migrate that first before adding new guides focusing on 8.6. Once done I will report back her.

I have made start to porting the old documentaio nover to the new format over at https://www.drupal.org/docs/8/themes/zurb-foundation-user-guide. It will take quite a while a while to complete.

I have asked the maintainers of the docs program how to deal with credit. For the D7 docs I copied/pasted so want list the old docs contributors but cannot see how at the moment.

Will there be, or can there be a document on upgrading from 8.x-5 -> 8.x-6? They seem quite different in all ways and having developed all but my mobile menu to find it doesn't work in 8.x-5 w/ current version of Drupal/jQuery...

@nimzie I do not think this will be documented. There is an issue about the jquery incompatibility (#2918888: Drupal 8.4 requires jQuery 3, which no longer supports load()) but there is no easy solution provided.

nimzie maybe if you can talk a little more about which foundation features are the trickiest to deal with updating?

On a different subject I still think we should remove the layouts from the 8.x-6.x theme. #2867688: compatibility problem with drupal-8.3.0 and ds-8.x-3.x and move them to foundation_layouts #2871917: Adopt broken layouts from Zurb Foundation theme

Alpha4 release tagged today. I think this was a good call since so many issues have been resolved. Thanks everyone for the months of work here. https://www.drupal.org/project/zurb_foundation/releases/8.x-6.0-alpha4

Dear HongPong why didin t you apply this patch zurb_foundation--starter-installs-outdated-version-of-foundation--2895757--27.patch
before release alpha 4
I installed alpha 4 still look zurb 6.3
best regards

+1 for Browser Sync

Hi,

What about this issue? Can you release a new alpha?

It looks to me, based on the links in the issue description, that the two remaining tasks to be resolved before the next alpha are:

• #2651666: Remove duplicate hard coded logo and site name in theme (which is ready for review)
• #2867688: compatibility problem with drupal-8.3.0 and ds-8.x-3.x, which is also being handled in #2989534: Consensus On Layouts

There are a couple other patches that are RTBC which could be included.

My hopes for the 6.x branch (maybe not for the next release, but for a stable release):

• #3051602: Gulp 4.x support
• #3029876: Upgrade to foundations-site 6.5+ and motion-ui 2.0+

My longer wishlist for ongoing 6.x development:

• Improvements to the theme settings, such as #3020069: Add breadcrumbs settings in theme settings
• Generally organize the settings page so that it is more user-friendly (looking at Bootstrap for inspiration...)
• Make the top-bar feature more configurable

Should we get a helper module going to host the drush commands in what is now the proper way? #2920472: Support automatic subtheme generation in Drupal 10+ / Drush 12+ . I would not say that the next alpha should be dependent on this but we should figure it out in 2020.

As I mentioned in other issue, I've created a zurb_foundation_companion module. Co-maintainers are welcome. :)

@asrob I have added your new module to the front page with a note that it's in alpha and a link to the Drush 9 issue #2920472: Support automatic subtheme generation in Drupal 10+ / Drush 12+ which I think makes sense. Thanks so much, I took a look at it and it seems cool :)

Also it appears I have more availability this month than expected to work on the theme. So I will try to do what I can on the outstanding issues and the modules outside the theme. Happy 2020 fellow Zurbers :)

@asrob just used your module and it works great thanks.

@HongPong First time user here of this theme. Which version is recommended to use atm?

@undersound3 I would stick with the 6.x dev version right now . https://www.drupal.org/project/zurb_foundation/releases/8.x-6.x-dev

This month I'm going to be working on the patches we have underway right now (and any evaluation you can give on them is helpful). on the other hand the dev server here seems to have just taken a nasty dive (eyeroll emoji).

@HongPong
I certainly will be able to evaluate the patches, no problem.

About the version to use. I am developing a site atm which I am to finish end of the month. There is an alpha or beta version right now. Which is best to use for this site right now? Or do you suggest to use the dev version and patch that on the go?

dev + patch on the go. We are trying to strip it down and push more elements (eg layouts, drush commands also apparently) out to the modules. It's been kept on alpha because we are still trying to significantly rewire this sort of thing. (and 'beta' is not supposed to make such API changes).

So, for an alpha6 release, can we say that the only blocking issue is #2989534: Consensus On Layouts? And to move forward with that issue we mainly need some patch testing.

Then could we start planning a beta release that incorporates the next wave of patches? Such as:

• #3109917: Upgrade to Foundation 6.7.4
• #3051602: Gulp 4.x support
• #3096839: Remove deprecated theme functions

And ideally any other significant build/api/dependency changes we need to make before Drupal 9.

I would like to propose we make a 8.x-6.0-alpha6 release, which will have the updates and release notes captured on the current dev branch page.

What are peoples' thoughts on that idea? Are there must-haves that it doesn't make sense to release another alpha without? I think there are a lot of useful patches in the dev version right now and it would feel nice to refocus our energy on the next wave of significant changes. It also gives people a chance to update their sub-themes more incrementally with the kinds of breaking changes we're making.

Then, for a 8.x-6.0-beta1, these issues and updates seem like must-haves to me:

• Refresh the documentation and the theme landing page to better highlight the 6.x branch (since it's the primary branch being maintained.)
• #3134562: Drupal 9 compatibility
• #3051602: Gulp 4.x support
• #3109917: Upgrade to Foundation 6.7.4
• #3117547: Using the XY-grid by default
• #3090024: Fix Drupal code style issues in base theme files

@sim_1 I love it!

Ok, I just published an alpha6 release! First time publishing one so hopefully I did it correctly. I'll update this issue description with next steps/target issues for a beta release.

What is the status of cutting an 8.6-beta?

@thhafner, according to the roadmap it'd be bumping foundation up to either 6.6.3 or 6.7.x.

There's also a few issues that need reviewing - I'm going to try and take a look at some of them, but more eyes on that would be good.

+1 for 6.7.x (last is v6.7.4)

I agree with @steveoriol, 6.6.3 was released on 09/04/2020, it's two years old now, better to choose the last release

That makes sense in that we're leaving alpha behind - it might require more work on the gulp workflow but that's better sooner than later. Aside from bumping up node requirements etc I don't think there's anything breaking looking asides from that by at the changelog: https://github.com/foundation/foundation-sites/releases

The only thing to (possibly) worry about is 6.6 will most likely break https://www.drupal.org/project/xy_grid_layouts

perhaps better to involve @itothegore and @pramann so that they can be part of this change and decide whether to go along with it or not

The only thing to (possibly) worry about is 6.6 will most likely break https://www.drupal.org/project/xy_grid_layouts

@erutan why this? XY Grid is still the current foundation sites grid implementation?

@thomas.frobieter: https://github.com/foundation/foundation-sites/pull/11405

I haven't actually dug into the module - it's mostly the SCSS side of things that changed, but if it uses the gutter css etc that'd break.

There's also some changes to _settings.scss etc that are minor but would need to pulled into custom subthemes: https://www.drupal.org/project/zurb_foundation/issues/3109917#comment-13...

I tossed up a quick poll for this here: https://survey.zohopublic.com/zs/GsCNn9

update: As of 2022-03-27 it's 2 no, 1 yes.

As of 2022-04-10 it's 3 no, 1 yes.

Two branches that have breaking changes, and then I think we're ready for beta:
- #3273854: Template updates to keep up with Core
- #3109917: Upgrade to Foundation 6.7.4

The update to the templates seems important to do before beta because we currently have really outdated field class names in our templates. And this means we diverge from core unnecessarily and it will make it harder to pull in core template logic in the future. It's a breaking change. We could modify the branch to keep the old classes too to make it less extreme.

The update to Foundation 6.7.4 is also a major update -- not because 6.7.4 is really different from what we have right now, but because I think it doesn't make sense to update it in isolation. And I really don't think we have the capacity to have a custom (drupal) build process for this theme. So that branch updates the build scripts and package.json to mirror the Foundation site template project build scripts. For the base theme this uses the foundation-sites-template because it is a fairly simple build process. For the sub-theme, I used the more robust foundation-zurb-template as reference. I also looked a little at the core Foundation build scripts to pull in linting.

Does anyone have time to comment/test/review?