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.
PS: There is no clue about the right issue queue yet.
Problem/Motivation
#2457875: [policy] Evolving and documenting Drupal core's structure, responsibilities, and decision-making introduces a format structure of the Drupal core project.
In order to make it easy for new people though, just using tags will result in a bad time for new contributors.
Things which should be presented somehow:
- What are the next steps needed to get this issue in
- Who to ask for
- ...
Proposed resolution
Remaining tasks
- Discuss and design how it could look like
- Implementation
- Feedback from the community
- Roll out
User interface changes
There should be some
Comments
Comment #1
xjmIs #2458505: Need better issue search tools to support new Drupal Core governance structure a partial duplicate of this?
Comment #2
jhodgdonI think this is more about making a checklist for contributors, and the other one is about tools for maintainers for searching issues, so I think they're separate issues.
Adding parent on this one though, and moving to drupalorg module. And I second the need for this issue.
Comment #3
YesCT CreditAttribution: YesCT commentedrelated #2013222: Add "Issue tasks" to project issues and correlate tasks with handbook documentation and other issues about putting context sensitive information on issues about what is next to do.
Comment #4
xjmSo there are actually several pieces of information related to signoffs that an issue could/should contain:
What signoffs might apply to any issue, and how this relates to our peer review process.
What signoffs apply to the particular issue. Taking #1847596: Remove Taxonomy term reference field in favor of Entity reference as an example, this issue needed:
So in that issue, it would have been great if the issue could easily signal to users that someone had identified that those signoffs were relevant, but not (e.g.) Documentation maintainer signoff. (@jhodgdon helped improve the documentation, but the impact on documentation was not significant but rather merely covered by the docs gate). Currently, this would be implemented by adding the various "Needs" tags.
Which of the above signoffs have already been made, by whom and when and where, with a link to any feedback they provided with that signoff, as well as signoffs that are needed but missing.
Comment #5
joelpittetRe #4, for signoff would or were you consider new tags? "Needs XXX signoff"
A way to help maintainers keep track and focus attention on issues needing their attention. And something that can be removed once complete to identify more ore less which comment signed off.
Comment #6
xjm@joelpittet, the plan is already to use new tags. See the FAQ on the main issue. This issue as I understand the purpose is about using something less obscure than tags to surface the information. :)
Comment #7
joelpittetThanks @xjm, lessoBSCure++
Comment #8
YesCT CreditAttribution: YesCT commentedtagging. being referenced in LA talk https://events.drupal.org/losangeles2015/sessions/drupalorg-changes-supp...