Posted by drinkypoo on August 18, 2006 at 10:23pm
Jump to:
| Project: | image_import |
| Version: | master |
| Component: | Documentation |
| Category: | bug report |
| Priority: | normal |
| Assigned: | Unassigned |
| Status: | closed (fixed) |
Issue Summary
Is walkah's image module even still a going concern? Does it work properly on 4.7? Will my existing non-walkah images still work if I change modules? The documentation badly needs clarification on these issues. At the very minimum it is necessary to tell us where to get the needed module.
Comments
#1
If you have questions about the image module, why not put them in its issue queue?
http://drupal.org/project/image
The download link says 4.7 and it was last update Aug 1, so I'd say it's still being maintained.
Michelle
#2
Because it's not a question about the image module, it's a question about THIS module's documentation, which says to use the image module. This is why I filed a Documentation bug report. I'm not sure if I can make this any more clear.
The point is that it might as well just say it requires image.module, because walkah's image.module is the current standard for drupal, and has been since 4.6. It's what you find if you visit http://drupal.org/project/image/ - in fact, you'd have to do a lot of work to even find an alternate image.module on the site.
Making sure people know it's walkah's image.module will just confuse them. There's also several old comments and such that tell how one found it in his snapshots, which is no longer necessary.
#3
You asked if the image module works on 4.7. That seemed to me like a question about the image module. I don't really get what the fact that walkah is the maintainer has to do with anything. It's possible that I'm just missing something since I don't use this module, but your post doesn't make a lot of sense. Anyway, I'm gonna drop it and let the person who maintains this module try and make some sense of it if he/she wants.
Michelle
#4
Hmm... Actually, I read it one more time after I posted and I think I finally get it. If I'm understanding right, you are suggesting he drop references to walkah in the docs. Which seems like a good idea, but isn't at all what you said in your original post. So, no, your original post wasn't clear at all.
Michelle
#5
Well, I apologize for being unclear. My point was that the documentation was unclear... If you read the docs then you can easily become confused, and I've seen other things while looking for the answers that indicate that this has been confusing people since the docs were written.
#6
revamped verbage.
#7