* Scott Courtney (scott@4th.com) wrote:
On Wednesday 23 March 2005 13:29, James Walker wrote:
This is a great new improvement for drupal, but we need to get this development moving forward for drupal 4.6
Indeed. Thanks for your work Gordon,
Please pardon if this is a dumb question, but what is the relationship between the various versions of this module in CVS?
There are three recent copies of image.module in the current CVS for contributions, as of tonight:
21469 2005-03-08 17:22 ./sandbox/walkah/image/45/image.module 21646 2005-03-08 17:22 ./sandbox/walkah/image/image.module 73187 2005-03-08 17:22 ./modules/image/image.module
The second one is the version of the image module that is going to be in 4.6, this is basically a complete rewrite of the one in the modules/images. module/images in the old version that is going to be removed very soon.
Now, it's fairly clear the difference between the first two -- one is for Drupal 4.5 and the other presumably for 4.6 (HEAD). But what about the third one? Where does it fit in? That's a vastly different file size, such that "diff" isn't even useful here.
I think that the version in the 45 directory is to be used as an upgrade path, so that you can move to the new version in the directory above.
I'm trying to test the upgrade process from the stable image.module from Drupal 4.5 to (something) for Drupal 4.6, but so far it seems that no matter which version I try, the associated image.inc file from the module directory conflicts with the image.inc module from Drupal's core "includes" directory.
To get this one working, just remove the include image.inc from the top of the image.module file. Don't feel silly, at the moment we are in a difficult position where the version in James sandbox is ready for cvs, but it has not been moved to the module directory. James said that this is going to happen very soon, and things will be alot easier. -- Gordon Heydon <gordon@heydon.com.au>