Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Migration from gorriecoe #229

Closed
maxime-rainville opened this issue Feb 18, 2024 · 0 comments
Closed

Migration from gorriecoe #229

maxime-rainville opened this issue Feb 18, 2024 · 0 comments

Comments

@maxime-rainville
Copy link

maxime-rainville commented Feb 18, 2024

As a developer maintaining a project using gorriecoe/silverstripe-linkfield, I have a a clear path and clear guidance on how to migrate to v4.

Acceptance criteria

  • An automated task exists to converts gorriecoe/silverstripe-linkfield data to v4 linkfield format.
    • The task accounts for versioning and all pre-existing links are assumed to be published.
    • Task accounts for List of links
    • Task can be extended to accommodate unusual usage of LinkField.
    • Task does not account for custom link types, but provides extensions.
  • Clear guidance on how to migrate to LinkField v4 is provided
  • Guidance covers the scenario where a project is upgraded all the way from CMS 4.
  • Guidance explicitly mentions that it is the developers responsibility to implement logic to cover custom link types.
  • Guidance mentions that we are assuming no versioning of gorriecoe links.
  • Guidance covers how to completely remove the gorriecoe module.
  • Guidance mentions feature gap between two linkfield implementations, but leave the developer to resolve these issue themselves. (e.g. gorriecoe's phone link as conversion methods to different phone number format)
  • Migration task is marked as @deprecated.
  • The task is disabled by default.

PRs

installer CI showing linkfield passing with the framework PR

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants