Support for Drupal 7 is ending on 5 January 2025—it’s time to migrate to Drupal 10! Learn about the many benefits of Drupal 10 and find migration tools in our resource center.
Problem/Motivation
In #3124762: Add 'lifecycle' key to .info.yml files we added a lifecycle
key to info files to communicate when modules are deprecated or obsolete.
However in #3215043: Indicate the non-stable statuses in admin/modules page as we started providing UI elements to go with this, we realised that we need to convey to the user the intended action.
Proposed resolution
Add a new lifecycle_link
key to info.yml files that links to a page on Drupal.org with advice for the user.
Remaining tasks
Add support for the key
Add tests
User interface changes
API changes
Data model changes
Release notes snippet
Comment | File | Size | Author |
---|---|---|---|
#5 | 3225812.patch | 7.76 KB | larowlan |
Comments
Comment #2
Gábor Hojtsylifecycle_description
, like the module has aname
anddescription
?Comment #3
catchI think it would be good for these to link to a page on Drupal.org rather than directly to replacement modules, this way we can update the documentation page over time without needing to update core. This brings up the question do we always want a custom message, or would a standard message with
lifecycle_link
key work?Comment #4
larowlanYeah, that's a much better idea 🧠
Updating the issue summary
Comment #5
larowlanAdded a check to the info parser that this is present and valid for both obsolete and deprecated.
Added text to https://www.drupal.org/about/core/policies/core-change-policies/deprecat... for Simpletest and Entity Reference.
Comment #6
andypostURL validation is tricky, and reminds me about #295021: filter_var() with FILTER_VALIDATE_URL accepts malformed URLs and rejects not all valid URLs
Comment #7
Gábor Hojtsy@andypost: hm, the sub-issues linked from #295021: filter_var() with FILTER_VALIDATE_URL accepts malformed URLs and rejects not all valid URLs have all been resolved. Not sure what's left of that at this point? Also that less used link protocols are not supported does not really concern this issue IMHO. That would not stop people from being able to assign a docs link.
I think the validation looks good, the tests are comprehensive. UI exposure of the value is in other issues. The requirement for this came from a UX team meeting last week to present this to users as remediation for the warning shown. So IMHO good to proceed.
Ps. the test link looks fun :D
Comment #9
catchCommitted 3726333 and pushed to 9.3.x. Thanks!
We need to update https://www.drupal.org/node/3215042 still.
Comment #10
Gábor HojtsyUpdated https://www.drupal.org/node/3215042/revisions/view/12360437/12360446 :)