[development] Confused: package value of info files

Earl Miles merlin at logrus.com
Thu Dec 21 00:41:01 UTC 2006

Earnie Boyd wrote:
> I have submitted a few info files for inclusion in the module and have 
> at times pointed to node/101009 by the maintainers to say that package 
> shouldn't be given.  However, node/64279 doesn't state that but instead 
> suggest "Your arbitrary grouping string" as the value.
> http://drupal.org/node/64279

 From the above page:

If you assign a package string for your module, on the admin/build/modules page 
it will be listed with other modules with the same category. If you do not 
assign one, it will simply be listed as 'Other'. Not assigning a package for 
your module is perfectly ok; in general packages are best used for modules that 
are distributed together or are meant to be used together. If you have any 
doubt, leave this field blank.

> http://drupal.org/node/101009
 From the above page:

If your module comes with other modules or is meant to be used exclusively with 
other modules, enter the name of the package here. If left blank, the module 
will be listed as 'Other'. In general, this field should only be used by large 
multi-module packages, or by modules meant to extend these packages, such as 
CCK, Views, E-Commerce, Organic Groups and the like. All other modules should 
leave this blank. As a guideline, four or more modules that depend on each 
other (or all on a single module) make a good candidate for a package. Fewer 
probably do not.

If used, the package string is used to group modules together on the module 
administration display; the string should therefore be the heading you would 
like your modules to appear under, and it needs to be consistent (in spelling 
and capitalization) in all .info files in which it appears. It should not use 
punctuation and it should follow the Drupal 5 capitalization standard as noted 

> I think that the original idea was for package to be used by those module
 > packages that contain more than one module to group their package together.

This is correct.

 > Can we have a consensus for what value should be given for 5.0 to package and
 > can we update both nodes with the consensus?

We have consensus already. Please do not muddy the waters further.

More information about the development mailing list