[drupal-devel] [feature] move image.module to core

robertDouglass drupal-devel at drupal.org
Thu Sep 8 17:22:25 UTC 2005

Issue status update for 
Post a follow up: 

 Project:      Drupal
 Version:      cvs
-Component:    other
+Component:    base system
 Category:     feature requests
 Priority:     normal
 Assigned to:  walkah
 Reported by:  robertDouglass
 Updated by:   robertDouglass
-Status:       active
+Status:       patch (code needs work)
 Attachment:   http://drupal.org/files/issues/image_in_core.patch.txt (29.01 KB)

So here's a patch. It needs work - some of the update tasks for getting
this ready for 4.7 are quite obtuse. Somebody with intimate knowledge
of the image module and HEAD should take a good look, but at least
there is a patch. There is still time left before the freeze, and
neither Dries nore Steven have indicated that they are opposed to
including this, but it will take some work. The next round is for
someone else.


Previous comments:

Fri, 24 Jun 2005 14:02:38 +0000 : robertDouglass

How do people feel about moving image.module to core? My personal view
is that it is the right thing to do. We will have had the entire 4.6
cycle to evaluate image.module and image.inc, and I think that they are
both on the same level of quality as Drupal as a whole. Furthermore,
image.module is essential to most known uses of Drupal, including
drupal.org. The amount of work needed for making this move is
relatively small. There is no new database schema. The biggest issue
would be the image.module specific upgrade script and the documentation
that would need to be written to warn and instruct people who might be
upgrading from the previous image module.



Sun, 26 Jun 2005 01:03:14 +0000 : kbahey

According to this http://drupal.org/node/25704, it is one of the most
downloaded modules on Drupal.org.

Also, part of it is already in core (image.inc).

So, for me, it makes sense to move it to core as well.

But: keep it minimalistic, with fancy addons as contribs.


Mon, 27 Jun 2005 23:05:33 +0000 : shane


But - I wouldn't want to lose site of the fact that the image.module is
WAY TOO BASIC and needs some more features to make it actually useful.  
The initial discussion regarding img_assist.module in the top20 page is
a great example of the problems with the workflow of adding images.


Tue, 28 Jun 2005 13:50:52 +0000 : Uwe Hermann

+1. The image module really belongs in core.



Wed, 29 Jun 2005 13:09:56 +0000 : walkah

robert - i'm flattered that you think so highly of the code... Dries and
I talked about putting image in core when I was doing the rewrite ...
and decided against it. I can't totally remember why now... 

I'm essentially +1 to this idea, and am fully willing to continue
maintaining a core image.module (and adding enhancements, etc).

One thing I think we need to figure out though is ... what do folks
want most out of a core image.module? (i.e. do we want galleries? just
easy inclusion in blog posts? bulk uploading? etc...)


Wed, 29 Jun 2005 14:04:40 +0000 : pegmonkey

+1  HOWEVER.... it wasn't ready and yet released for 4.6.  I'd say it's
a good consideration, but I advise caution.  The upgrade to 4.6 just
about destroyed my working images.  Derivatives were broken and though
fixed now, had some major issues that took a while to get sorted out. 
Yes I backed it up.. so no big deal.  But, still it was far from ready
to be released. I had actually considered solutions other than drupal
for my sites during that time, but I stuck with it.  Others might not
have been as persistant.  Images are a very important part of most web
sites so it should go in eventually.  I'd have given the initial 4.6
release an alpha rating at best.  I would suggest that if it goes in,
it go in as a very basic module and then additional modules that add
features be created.  

I think mass upload would be good to include.  Galleries and various
other features could be external modules.


Wed, 13 Jul 2005 04:45:49 +0000 : Zed Pobre

I'd volunteer a +1, if it meant that the breakage would be less likely
to occur in the future.  I'm still running 4.5.2 because image.module
is too critical to my website, and I can't deal with it breaking.  If
making it a core component meant tighter integration and upgrade
handling all around, I'd be much happier.

Bulk upload is a key feature for me, by the way, one of the other
reasons I haven't forged ahead.  I make heavy use of the old
image.module galleries, but if additional modules will give me any
gallery ability, I'm not very particular about the features or the
exact form.  The pictures just need to be accessible.


Mon, 15 Aug 2005 20:22:01 +0000 : walkah

i'm gonna see what I can do on this front... assigning so i don't forget


Mon, 15 Aug 2005 21:45:01 +0000 : sepeck

+1 for me.
So far most/any issue's that people have experianced seem to have come
down to permissions issues specific to the server configuration that
they were on and whether the files/images directory existed or not..


Mon, 15 Aug 2005 22:28:39 +0000 : robertDouglass

I'm glad that there is so much support for the idea. It will be
especially nice because the imagemagick.inc file can be in the includes
directory from the start (I always forget to move it). Are there any
reasons NOT to put this module in core? If there are tasks that still
need doing, please, let's talk about them so that we can get them done
before the code freeze.


Tue, 23 Aug 2005 13:19:09 +0000 : neuraxon77

+1 core it. please.
With the galleries.
More work needs to be done, and could be at a later date. They way it
is now is functional as far as i'm concerned. The img_assist module
still needs work but again something like it IMHO should be in core
There needs to be more modules like these essential to content creation
in core.
Quick! Get it in before the code freeze. :)
If it has Images, Galleries and the Free Tagging, 4.7 should be good.

More information about the drupal-devel mailing list