[development] Modules page rework

Earl Miles merlin at logrus.com
Sat Jul 29 20:21:20 UTC 2006

Morbus Iff wrote:
>>>  * The version number is irrelevant and useless for a huge number
>> um, version is one of the main benefits of this. i like being able to 
>> look at my installed modules and then 
>> http://drupal.org/project/Modules and see if i am up to date.
> Um, it's obvious you missed my point. Currently, the version number in 
> his screen is for the major release of Drupal. Modules have many many 
> smaller releases during the life cycle of a Drupal release. Knowing that 
> a module has been released for 4.8.0 doesn't mean you have the latest 
> version, because active development of a module could mean that you're 
> out of date within a week. Basing module numbers off the core version 
> doesn't allow any indication of module version and is thus useless.

If we go with Derek's proposal, a contrib module would probably have a 
version of 4.8.x-1.0 or maybe even just '1.0' since 'required Drupal 
version' is a separate field and in the modules page, you know. But for 
core modules, I threw in the core version number because it's the only 
number that really makes a lot of sense. I suppose we can give core 
modules their own version numbers but that would likely be a major 
hassle and not worth it.

More information about the development mailing list