2006/12/07 Earnie Boyd

* taxonomy_list.info (package): Give a more appropriate value.
(version): Declare as per http://drupal.org/node/87298.

Index: taxonomy_list.info
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/drupal/contributions/modules/taxonomy_list/taxonomy_list.info,v
retrieving revision 1.1
diff -u -3 -p -r1.1 taxonomy_list.info
--- taxonomy_list.info 13 Nov 2006 08:34:43 -0000 1.1
+++ taxonomy_list.info 7 Dec 2006 17:50:52 -0000
@@ -2,4 +2,5 @@
name = Taxonomy List
description = "List terms under a specific vocabulary"
dependencies = "taxonomy"
-package = "Core - optional"
+package = Taxonomy
+version = $Name$

CommentFileSizeAuthor
#12 taxonomy_list.info_2.patch617 bytesmoonray
#5 taxonomy_list.info_1.patch637 bytesmoonray
#2 taxonomy_list.info_0.patch635 bytesmoonray
taxonomy_list.info.patch697 bytesAnonymous (not verified)

Comments

BoogieBug’s picture

BoogieBug commented
Assigned: Unassigned » BoogieBug
Status: Needs review » Reviewed & tested by the community
moonray’s picture

moonray commented
StatusFileSize
new taxonomy_list.info_0.patch635 bytes

I would suggest a slight change in the description.
Find patch modified attached.

moonray’s picture

moonray commented
Status: Reviewed & tested by the community » Needs review
Anonymous’s picture

Anonymous (not verified) commented
Status: Needs review » Needs work

Should package be set? Based on experience with other modules I'd suggest not. So we both needed to remove delete the package line.

It needs to be version = "$Name$" with quotes.

See http://drupal.org/node/101009 for more info on .info.

moonray’s picture

moonray commented
StatusFileSize
new taxonomy_list.info_1.patch637 bytes

You're right about "$Name$"
Attached patch fixes this.

Now, in regards to package, this basically sets the grouping. And from my experience with large amounts of modules, you want to have them broken up into categories, so as to find them easily. And it makes sense to have this in the Taxonomy package/group/category.

It's a pain having to wade through "Other" when you have a large list of uncategorized modules.

Anonymous’s picture

Anonymous (not verified) commented

Don't complain to me, it's like preaching to the choir; I fought that battle and lost. The hardhat supervisors have deemed it inappropriate to use a package value unless it fits very specified criteria and this module doesn't fit the criteria. IMO the variable was miss named for its intended purpose. That purpose is to group contributions that contain more than three separate interoperable modules in the same package (tarball set).

So we must live with no package for Taxonomy_List in the .info file because it is only one module in a tarball set.

moonray’s picture

moonray commented

Just read the text at Writing .info files (Drupal 5.x)

...or is meant to be used exclusively with other modules, enter the name of the package here.... In general, this field should only be used ... by modules meant to extend these packages, such as CCK, Views, E-Commerce, Organic Groups and the like.... 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.

It seems to me that Taxonomy is a viable candidate. Now, whom do you put this to in order to approve it?

Anonymous’s picture

Anonymous (not verified) commented

The battle I fought for was Taxonomy as a package value. I gave up. Take a look at http://drupal.org/user/86710/track to try to find the specific issues I posted to on the subject. And research the development list archive. I agree with you. Good luck.

moonray’s picture

moonray commented

Back again. :-)

So, I read most of your threads pertaining to the subject, and the drupal developers mailing list entries as well, and nowhere does it state that there is a fixed list of packages. In fact, most of the comments agree with my assessment to create a Taxonomy package.

All modules that depend on taxonomy can't work without it, so it would stand that they extend the taxonomy module. Which makes Taxonomy a package.

Now, if anyone can prove me wrong, by all means. But I believe that, since there are at least 4 taxonomy based modules, there needs to be a taxonomy package. :)

moonray’s picture

moonray commented

Just to add: I'm not saying that any of the modules in the Taxonomy category on drupal.org should be part of the taxonomy package. Now, which ones should be part of taxonomy package, and which should not, would be a whole different discussion.

moonray’s picture

moonray commented

OK, ignore the last 2 posts then.
I just found a whole new thread in drupal developers mailing list; the one you were referring to. I stand corrected.

moonray’s picture

moonray commented
Status: Needs work » Needs review
StatusFileSize
new taxonomy_list.info_2.patch617 bytes

package has been removed.
Hopefully the final patch for this.

Anonymous’s picture

Anonymous (not verified) commented
Status: Needs review » Reviewed & tested by the community

Looks good to me. Now BoogieBug can commit if he thinks it is appropriate.

BoogieBug’s picture

BoogieBug commented
Status: Reviewed & tested by the community » Closed (fixed)