Create a core modules list per versions page?

We can either
1. have a comparison table on the same page shows what core module comes with each version.
or
2. have separate child pages for each version.
oh..wait, then each module page will need to have multiple parents, is it doable?

Maybe one big table is the way to go...and it requires permission to use table tags.

There is a "Drupal 6.x" tag, isn't that enough?

The problem with the tag may be that there is no way to see that tag until you've already clicked into the page. Thus someone who's using drupal 5.x and clicks on the actions.module has to then look at the tag to find out he/she doesn't have that module available in core. At that point it was available as a contrib. Which can be viewed as another layer of confusion.

yeah, I agree that the info is there already but it is annoying to have to click into pages to see it. With the redesign moving forward do we want to completely rethink how we track docs for core modules? One big desire for contrib projects is to get the documentation attached to the project page itself. Core is a touch different but do we want to think of ways to link core module docs to the Drupal project page or is it different enough that we want a special section in the handbook for it?

Given the current state (not attached to projects, no good version limiting, views, etc.) we could make a simple list/chart on the core module landing page that shows any differences between the supported versions of Drupal (currently 5 and 6).

We've got related issues as well:
#155082: Core Modules List suggested changes
#356830: Document the removal of drupal.module in 6.x and site_network module

Big +1 to rethinking how we track docs for core modules.

If we're doing a list of core modules it really should be done dynamically from tags and Views. That way we can use the same content in a more coherent structure (first things first, related stuff together etc) rather than only in an alphabetical order that jumbles everything up.

Same with contrib modules, we should be able to reuse content in various ways. As part of its project page, in lists, and within the context of larger discussions like site recipes.

I like leehunter's idea, and I know dww's working on project* for 6, so this might be worth visiting more seriously when d.o is finally upgraded to 6?

IMO, robots.txt should be preventing revisions, and diffs, being indexed. This is a very confusing landing page for someone coming into Drupal. If I go to the actual book page I have no issue: http://drupal.org/node/279

Move this to webmasters queue?

Regarding #8...

The main page http://drupal.org/node/279 also does not show you which modules go with which versions of Drupal, so this issue is still relevant to that page.

And I do not think that revisions page came up in a search engine search. I think that someone added that comment when he/she made a revision of the page. I tried a Google search to bring up that revisions page (using words specific to the page and limiting to site:drupal.org) and I was only able to make it come up with this issue, not the revision view itself.

Regarding the issue itself, as people have commented above, the problem is that when you get to the Core Modules page, you are presented with a list of all the child pages at the bottom, one child page for each core module, and all you see is the titles of the modules as links below, so you cannot scan to see the versions appropriate for each module. It would be easy enough to make versions more obvious by either of the following:

a) Put the version(s) of Drupal in the titles of the child pages, e.g.
"Aggregator: publishing syndicated content (Drupal 4.6 - Drupal 7.x)"

or

b) Put a list in the text of the Core Modules page, which need not have links or descriptions, e.g.:

Here is a list of which Drupal versions contain each core module:
* Aggregator: Drupal 4.6 - Drupal 7
* Block: Drupal 4.6 - Drupal 7.x
etc.

I would be happy to do either of these. I think (a) has some advantage, in that the title of the page would be maintained on the module's page, so as we move forward, it would be easy enough to remember to edit it there... but then again, (b) could include some notes about changes, e.g.
* Drupal: Drupal 4.6 - Drupal 5.x (See contributed Site Network module for Drupal 6.x)

Thoughts? I think I like (b)...

I don't know that 4.6 and 4.7 need to be listed any more as these are unsupported.

That is a good point about 4.x. We still have those entries in the Book Page version taxonomy, though.

realizing this may be completely out of scope (and i have no idea what happened with this since last discussed)... but geez, wouldn't it be nice to have an automated way to archive docs for modules per major version (D6, D7, etc.) and also have them automatically tied into the project/module page on d.o?

at least we now have the handbook links for each core module in their individual help pages, but these still aren't really tied into the project pages, or any kind of master index (which surely, would be useful as well).

going to recategorize this as a feature request. if anyone has info on what (if anything) came of plans for this in the redesign, pls do update.

This page is archived and the d.o redesign has launched giving us http://drupal.org/download and http://drupal.org/project/modules which have some nice version filters etc. It's still not a list of core modules, but it's something. Renaming this ticket to reflect the piece of the request that isn't done (an updated core modules per version list).

this has gotten redundant to redesign stuff as well as issue #950672: Update "Drupal 6 contributed modules that are in Drupal 7 core" - closing