Problem/Motivation
In #3393557: [upstream] Update CKEditor 5 to 40.0.0 a change to the ckeditor5.schema.yml file was made which placed a label under mapping which creates an invalid config schema.
This issue was fixed in #3401883: Introduce Mapping::getValidKeys(), ::getRequiredKeys() etc. as a small sub-change of the larger PR.
The problem is that the bug is introduced in 10.2 and the fix was made in an issue which is only shipped as Drupal 11 and will not be backported. This means that without further intervention the ckeditor5.schema.yml file will be invalid for the rest of the Druapl 10 lifecycle.
Tools such as POTX no longer work for any project that runs it with the 10.x version of the ckeditor5 module.
Steps to reproduce
Proposed resolution
Pick out the moving of the label property to the correct location (above mapping) and backport this as bugfix to 10.2.x and the rest of the 10.x versions.
Merge request link
Remaining tasks
User interface changes
API changes
Data model changes
Release notes snippet
Issue fork drupal-3418691
Show commands
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:
- 3418691-ckeditor5-module-has
changes, plain diff MR !6421
Comments
Comment #3
kingdutchCreated a merge request against 10.2.x with the required change.
Credits to ronaldtebrake for debugging this in our codebases and finding the culprit.
Comment #4
kingdutchComment #5
dwwGood find! The change itself is small, looks good, and makes sense.
However, I'm not sure if we need a test for this. Typically we do, but this seems like a bit of a weird case. I'm going to ping some folks in #bugsmash in Slack about it to get more input. But tentative +1 to RTBC'ing this as-is to fix this before any more 10.2.x releases go out.
Comment #6
catchI think it's OK to stop the bleeding without test coverage, but we should open a follow-up to add it so we don't do a similar thing again.
Comment #7
dwwGreat, thanks!
Needs followup#3418770: Add automated test coverage that POTX works against all of coreComment #8
dwwOh, and I guess that means I can RTBC this, since I didn't touch the code. Thanks again!
Comment #10
dwwCrediting @ronaldtebrake by request
Comment #11
dwwAlso crediting @kingdutch for the MR and myself for reviews, followup, etc.
Comment #13
larowlanCommitted to 10.2.x