[development] Some of core to contrib?

Nathaniel Catchpole catch56 at googlemail.com
Wed Apr 22 09:17:17 UTC 2009

> Gerhard Killesreiter schrieb:

> Let me illustrate the "why".
> I am in the process of writing a slightly changed version of the dblog
> module. Most of the changes will be in the .install file.
> While I do think my changes are a good idea, others might disagree. It
> is one of the patches where Dries was more stubborn than me after all
> (http://drupal.org/node/78503, for the interested reader).
> Now, should I really call this dblog and use the 6--2 branch

Alex is only talking about backporting patches which are actually in
Drupal 7 already (as far as I know), so assuming that patch gets
refreshed and committed, why not? A module with an issue queue is
better than people clamouring for 'can I have a D6 version of this
patch plz' on fixed issues in the core queue which are never going to
get a straight backport in core itself.

However I think using the actual namespace for the module does bring
up some issues (hook_update_N() and just general potential confusion)
- so we could consider aggregator_backport and dblog_backport or
something instead (or at least really, really clear and standard
descriptions on project pages).

Another example where this is has happened already is tracker2 (which
runs on Drupal.org) - although the issue it fixes is still a critical
bug in HEAD and hasn't been updated in a while - hence why I think a
2.x branch of core modules is a good idea - it saves having to
manually apply patches, fork, or reinvent the wheel - all of which has
happened with aggregator, tracker, comment and others to various
levels of success and confusion.


More information about the development mailing list