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
No new problems here really, but we haven't discussed it:
As soon as we add system_update_8100(), it will be impossible to run sites on 8.1.x, because if we add system_update_8030() to both 8.0.x and 8.1.x afterwards, then that will not run (schema version is higher).
While 8.1.x is currently dev only, then we can just say that running it isn't supported.
However, once we get to beta/rc, I'd expect people to start running it - especially for new site development where that site is going to launch after April 20th.
Proposed resolution
Options:
1. Ignore this completely, possibly keep head2head going.
2. Ignore this until beta or release candidate, then try to make any new updates to the 8.0.x branch also run on 8.1.x (by having two 8.1.x updates and checking state etc.)
3. Ignore this until beta or release candidate, then just try not to commit any hook_update_N() to 8.0.x at all from then onwards.
4. Work on a replacement update system that doesn't rely on sequential function numbering (but still supports dependencies), then use that for all 8.1.x updates
Comments
Comment #2
xjmI think there is an option 5, which is using Migrate for minor-to-minor updates. Might have to be combined with at least some changes to the update system to completely avoid the problem.
IMO we have to do option 2 for at least 8.0.x, because 4 and 5 are both minor version targets themselves and 1 and 3 don't cover the case where we have a security or data loss critical that requires an update and it absolutely needs to go in both branches.
We can do option 3 in addition to minimize the problem. We already discussed generally avoiding fixes that require updates in patch releases where possible (it's on https://www.drupal.org/core/d8-allowed-changes#minor) and once we get to beta, the fix is only 2 months away. But we need to have an option for high-priority criticals and we might find it's worth it for other bugfixes as well.
Comment #3
catchComment #4
catchComment #5
claudiu.cristeaJust a related question: If we have 8.1 upgrades, should we wrap them in
@addtogroup updates-8.1.0, or? I have such a case in #2627678: Specify view mode to be used by comment formatter.Comment #7
xjmMoving back since this issue is specifically about 8.1.x (though it will be later for 8.2.x etc.), but we probably need to sort it soon.
Comment #8
catchFor now I think we should default to option #3 - no new updates in 8.0.x from now on.
When we have a critical bug or security issue that requires an update, we'll have to look at the specific update function and do #2 - i.e. try to make it work for 8.0-8.1 and 8.1-8.1.
Comment #20
quietone CreditAttribution: quietone at PreviousNext commentedChanging tag
Comment #21
catchMarking this duplicate of #3108658: [policy] Handling update path divergence between 9.5.x and 10.1.x which describes a similar problem for all minor releases.