Closed (fixed)
Project:
Page Analytics
Version:
1.0.0-beta6
Component:
Code
Priority:
Normal
Category:
Feature request
Assigned:
Reporter:
Created:
5 Feb 2026 at 16:19 UTC
Updated:
6 Mar 2026 at 11:30 UTC
Jump to comment: Most recent
Add a textarea to exclude certain paths (with useful defaults).
e.g. currently tracks /contextual/render maybe because we're using BigPipe?
Start within a Git clone of the project using the version control instructions.
Or, if you do not have SSH keys set up on git.drupalcode.org:
Comments
Comment #2
firflantThat's a clever idea - it makes the module more personalizable and it follows the general convention. I will include it in a next release.
Comment #3
firflantExcluding criteria configuration in added to version beta5 https://www.drupal.org/project/page_analytics/releases/1.0.0-beta5
Comment #4
anybodyThanks @firflant
I'd vote to include typical exclusion paths like:
by default?
Comment #5
firflantadmin pages should be excluded by default - textfield should be autofilled after installing the module from scratch, but latest version also includes an update that sets this field, if empty. Any other paths that should be excluded?
Comment #6
anybodyThanks @firflant
In posthog module we're using:
But I guess you're already using
https://api.drupal.org/api/drupal/core%21lib%21Drupal%21Core%21Routing%2...
for admin routes?
Comment #7
firflantI don't. And maybe we can stay with that one form of excluding paths, just for a transparency? The list that you provided is very handy. I will update the defaults soon.
Comment #8
anybodyWell the difference is that the list isn't that easy to maintain for all cases but should be kept for manual additions IMHO.
Admin routes are for example also
node/*/*- (typically it's anything rendered in the admin theme).But to be fair, similar to
node/*/*there are paths for all kinds of entities like users, taxonomy terms, commerce products in contrib etc. plus ajax routed and others... so it might make sense to split this into the human defined list and the technical admin routes part... I think I'd try that.Instead I'd personally remove the authenticated user checkbox and instead add a fieldset and list of roles to include / exclude like other similar modules do (or use the Context API). Maybe just sleep a night about it :)
And these are just my thoughts, you're the maintainer, you decide.
Comment #9
firflantComment #10
firflantYou are right that this list of admin urls is unsafe. Now it seems that it is better to replace excluded paths textfield with an "Excude admin paths" checkbox.
Replacing authenticated checkbox with a roles selector - it might be worth to have it before the 1.0.0 release.
How about having a "Excluding" formgroup just like this:
Maybe there is no need to bloat the page responses with additional page checks. I do not find it useful in this scenario.
Comment #11
anybody#10 is good, but I'd definitely keep the textarea to allow additional exclusions based on paths. This way users have a custom way to exclude paths from front - or backend if needed.
Comment #12
firflantFinal shape to develop:
Comment #13
anybodyNice!! +1
Comment #14
firflantAdded in beta6 https://www.drupal.org/project/page_analytics/releases/1.0.0-beta6
Have a look
Comment #15
anybody@firflant thanks. Maybe in the future let's better use MRs and review them prior to release?
Otherwise it might be hard to undo things already released.
But again, you're the maintainer, you decide. Just my 2 cents. :)
Comment #16
firflantSure thing. If you have any suggestions to improve the existing flow (eg branching strategy, release strategy etc), feel free to share. That's my first project on drupal.org and I look forward to understand the standards there.
Comment #17
anybodyThanks @firflant great work, just tried it!
I created a MR with some minor changes to make the text clearer.
Additionally I was wondering if we should remove
to also allow anonymous users to be selected, maybe there are cases for that e.g. in intranet? (Quite sure it's still an edge-case, just a thought to leave it to the site owner.)
Comment #19
firflant@anybody description change looks good. I haven't seen the use case for an anonymous role, but you are right about the intranet sites. We can turn the anonymous role on. Do you think you can do that in the same MR?
Comment #20
anybody@firflant yes, I did that!
Comment #21
firflantAvailable configuration options are optimal now. Marking issue as done.
Comment #22
firflantComment #25
anybodyNice!! Thank you @firflant!