I started development in the forum install profile. Link to releases.

Comments

mitchell’s picture

Title: Move Forum to CCK » Move Forum to CCK + Views

and views

catch’s picture

By CCK do you mean replacing the forum / taxonomy dependency with field API? I'd be more tempted to use something like book / menu does for the hierarchy handling. Does this need to be postponed on views in core then?

damien tournoud’s picture

Title: Move Forum to CCK + Views » The new "forum" module uses Core namespace
Project: Drupal core » Drupal.org site moderators
Version: 7.x-dev »
Component: forum.module » Content moderation
Category: task » bug
Priority: Normal » Critical

You should not name any of the drupal.org project using the same name as a core module. This would prevent us to extract move modules out of core at a later stage.

Please rename your module.

michelle’s picture

I complained about this 18 weeks ago and have been ignored: #349794: Change project name to avoid namespace conflict with forum.module Thought I admit the namespace needs of core forum moving to contrib hadn't occured to me. I was just concerned about having something that isn't related to core forum named "forum". That's a very good point about the core->contrib path.

Michelle

damien tournoud’s picture

Title: The new "forum" module uses Core namespace » The "forum" installation profile uses Core namespace
mitchell’s picture

Title: The "forum" installation profile uses Core namespace » Move Forum to CCK + Views
Project: Drupal.org site moderators » Drupal core
Version: » 7.x-dev
Component: Content moderation » forum.module
Category: bug » task
Priority: Critical » Normal

@catch: Yes, a major design improvement, imho, is that this implementation does not depend on taxonomy. The content types use node references, and it works very nicely.

A major portion of this is postponed till #286665: SEE ISSUE #1805996 -- Moving Views into Drupal Core and even more so #363410: Port Views to the Drupal 7 database layer. However we can still cover other aspects here, such as modeling the content types, discussing functionality, etc.

@Damien Tournoud: Please avoid changing issues away from the author's intent. As Michelle pointed out, an issue already exists: #349794: Change project name to avoid namespace conflict with forum.module. Please continue that discussion or create another issue in the Drupal.org webmasters queue.

webchick’s picture

Status: Active » Postponed
giorgio79’s picture

Hello opensanta,

Is this still on the plate? :)

I have found this by searching on how to put a forum on each node. Kind of like Amazon's product pages where each product gets a forum.

There was a discussion here as well for the same request:
http://drupal.org/node/137456

catch’s picture

Version: 7.x-dev » 8.x-dev

On the plate to the same extent that Views in core is on the plate. However look at advanced_forum in contrib for most things forum related.

michelle’s picture

Status: Postponed » Closed (won't fix)

Just doing some cleanup... Views is not going into D8. Moving the forum to "CCK" makes no sense, even if you substitute "Field UI". While it may be possible that core forum gets radical changes some day, I seriously doubt it will be in D8 and there's not a lot of point in keeping this issue open, even postponed, when it will be years, at least, before anything happens. If someone decides to do a massive change of core forum, I'm sure they can handle making a new issue for it. :)

Michelle

webchick’s picture

Sorry, but why is Views not going into D8? We are in code thaw, after all. :) Anything's on the table. There are also initiatives to at least put entity-level listing pages into core, ala #1210366: Per-bundle node listing pages, blocks, feeds..

michelle’s picture

Sorry, I thought merlinofchaos said it wouldn't happen in D8. If I'm mis-remembering, I apologize. I mostly closed this one since it's an old, mixed up issue that's changed focus once already. I figured if anyone decides to mount an effort to put a Views-based forum into core that a nice fresh issue would make more sense. If I'm wrong, feel free to re-open. I was just trying to clean up. :)

Michelle