►
From YouTube: 2022/06/02 - Weekly Dev Meeting
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
It's
june
2nd
2022,
and
this
is
the
backdrop
weekly
developer
meeting.
We
get
together
every
week
to
talk
about
challenges
and
problems
facing
backdrop,
developments
we'll
do
some
introductions
here.
My
name
is
nate
lampton,
I'm
quick
sketch
on
the
internet,
calling
from
oakland
california
and
let's
go
to
robert
and
then
jen.
C
John
lampton
joining
from
oakland
california
and
I
hope
to
have
a
new
release
for
the
google
analytics
module
out
by
the
end
of
the
day
for
version
4
support.
A
Great
thanks,
jen
tim
and
then
justin.
D
I'm
tim
erickson
st
paul
tim
in
deerwood
minnesota
and
I
am
really
excited
to
get
an
update
to
the
google
analytics
function
because
I've
had
clients
asking
about
it
this
week.
So
thank
you,
chad.
A
Thanks
tim
justin
and
then
alejandro.
A
Great
yeah,
you
guys
are
almost
neighbors
all
right.
Great
welcome
everyone.
First,
we'll
do
off
do
a
little
community
and
contribution
updates.
Jen
has
the
latest
on
those
items.
C
Sure
so
we
had
a
handful
of
new
modules
out
in
the
last
week
is
pretty
interesting.
Organic
groups
and
organic
groups
subgroups,
probably
the
most
exciting
ones,
those
who
have
got
our
newsletter
probably
heard
about
those
there,
but
we
also
have
taxonomy
menu
trails
and
two
recipes
welcome
recipe
and
user
recipe,
as
well
as
bar
codes,
which
actually
came
out
last
thursday.
But
I
don't
remember
if
we
mentioned
it
or
not,
last
thursday,
so
I
figured
I
just
mentioned
it
again
today.
A
A
Fantastic,
okay,
excellent!
Let's
see
we
have
a
forum
post
where
we
solicit
questions
asynchronously.
Throughout
the
week
there
was
only
one
post
to
the
forum
about
topics
to
discuss
from
bw
panda.
It's
mostly
around
issue.
5637,
I'm
not
familiar
with
this
one,
but
tim
I
think,
checked
in
on
it
before
we
started.
Could
you.
B
D
I
think
I
triggered
this
discussion
because
I
posted
in
in
the
forum
I
was
looking
for
if
there
was
a
command
line
tool
to
like
lay
out
a
module,
like,
I
think
in
drupal,
the
drupal
console
did
that
for
a
while,
you
could
just
type
a
command
and
it
would
spin
up
a
a
dev
module
for
you.
I
don't
know
if
grush
did
that
for
drupal
and
that's.
D
C
Sure
so
the
answer
to
that
question
is,
I
don't
know
if
there's
a
command
line
tool
that
does
that,
but
if
you're
trying
to
make
a
project
from
github
github
has
a
button
push
that'll
do
that
for
you,
and
so
we
have
three
projects
set
up
right
now,
as
templates
in
github,
where,
if
you
go
to
create
a
new
project,
it's
like
do
you
want
to
copy
module
theme
or
layout
and
it'll?
C
Let
you
create
one
of
those
three
things
based
on
a
previous
reference,
but
before
I
set
up
the
github
project
templates
through
github
bw
panda
had
already
set
up
templates
in
a
different
group.
In
the
backdrop
ops
group
that
weren't
actually
hooked
up
to
can
trip-
and
I
didn't
see
those-
and
so
I
think
I
thought
I'd
heard
of
them
before,
but
then
I
couldn't
find
them
because
I
was
looking
and
contributing.
C
So
we
both
did
the
same
work
in
different
places
and
so
now
we're
in
a
situation
where
we've
got
very
similar
projects
in
two
different
locations
and
pwp
pan
was
like.
We
need
to
clean
up
this,
which
is
true.
I
don't
really
have
any
particular
preference
to
which
ones
we
use.
I
do
want
to
have
them
hooked
up
to
the
github
button,
push
template
system
but-
and
I
would
like
to
not
lose
any
work
that
was
done
in
any
one
place
than
any
other
so
yeah.
C
D
C
C
A
It
looks
like
it
lets
you
do
both
this
is.
This
is
cool.
I
didn't
know
you
could
do
this
sorry
hijacking
the
screen
share
here.
So
when
you
hit
new
under
here
on
on
the
under
backdrop,
contrib,
you
can
choose
a
template
like
I
want
to
make
a
module
and
then
you
can
choose
like
if
you
want
to
put
it
under
your
repository
and-
and
you
got
to
like
choose
like
the
whole
thing,
like
my
new
module,
which
is
crazy.
So
this
would
this
would
duplicate
the
entire
repository,
which
sounds
great.
E
A
A
Yeah
well,
anyway,
one
of
the
questions
I
have
here
jen
is
that
that
github
template
ability
does
that
have
to
be
within
the
same
group.
A
E
A
C
D
C
D
D
A
A
They
can
they
can
do
it
test
it
with
their
own
github
account.
I
think
if,
assuming
that
this
isn't
group
specific,
you
know
like
like
backdrop:
contrib
is
an
organization
not
an
individual,
and
I'm
not
sure.
If
that
changes,
what
kind
of
options
you
have.
A
But
I
guess
we
also
could
just
find
github's
documentation.
Hopefully
they
have
some.
Sometimes
it
can
be
hard
to
find.
A
Okay,
but
yes
tim
you,
you
got
it
right.
If,
if
we
can,
if
we
can
use
backdrop
ops,
that's
that
would
be
preferable
for
everybody.
I
think
it's
just
a
matter
of
technical
limitation,
but
we've
been
stuck
in
this
situation
several
times
before,
where
we
start
using
github
tools
before
they're
really
mature,
and
then
we
get
stuck
using
them.
The
old
way.
E
A
Definitely
would
be
preferable
if
we
could
get
off
of
this
as
soon
as
possible
if
that
capability
does
exist
because
yeah
that's
how
we
ended
up
with
like
backdrop,
issues
versus
backdrop,
for
example,.
C
Into
the
settings
on
that
group
and
see
if
it
lets,
we
reference
something
from
somewhere
else,.
D
A
Okay,
great,
let's
see
I'll
mention
this
one.
First
alejandro
brought
up
this
issue
that
doc
wilmont
and
he
have
been
working
on
issue
40
5482,
the
layout
relationship,
plugin
layout
relationship
author
from
node
passes
the
wrong
context,
data
and
this
issue
has
been
open
for
quite
a
while.
That's
effectively
our
relationship
for
user,
author
node,
author
isn't
isn't
working
correctly.
A
I
appreciate
the
the
back
and
forth
you've
been
having
with
with
drawmont
here,
but
as
far
as
like
getting
additional
feedback.
This
is
this
is
going
to
take
some
looking
at,
I
think,
to
provide
anything
anything
valuable.
So
I
can't
really
comment
on
it
here
and
now,
but
this
is
critical,
because
it's
it's
basically,
you
know
getting
user
properties
from
the
node
or
about
the
author,
like
the
user's
picture,
who
created
the
node,
doesn't
work
correctly.
So
this
is.
This
is
really
important
right
and.
F
If
they
may,
I
may
add
it's
not
only
the
the
user.
You
know.
Organic
groups
also
uses
some
relationships
that
we
can't
use
because
of
this
by
basically,
so
it's
blocking
that
too.
A
Excellent,
I
mean
excellent,
thank
you
for
bringing
that
up.
It's
not
excellent,
yeah
great
okay
well
anyway.
5482
needs
needs
some
additional
thoughts
and
help
alejandra
thanks
so
much
for
jumping
in
there
and
helping
dr
mont
on
that
I'll
I'll.
Try
to
give
it
a
look
too.
A
Okay-
and
we
talked
about
this
one
before
the
meeting
started,
it
kind
of
postponed
the
meeting
a
bit
there's
a
an
issue
for
1
20
3,
that
is
issue
5632,
providing
the
ability
to
disable
entity.
Caching,
I'm
trying
to
think
of
when
we
introduced
entity.
Caching
was
it
like
120
or
something
like
that.
It's
been
a
couple
of
releases
now
that
we've
had
caching
at
the
load
level
per
entity,
type
and
issue.
A
5632
proposes
an
an
interface
of
the
ability
to
disable
it
per
bundle
type
so
basically
like
per
node
type
or
yeah.
I
guess
prototype
being
that
the
most
typical
example.
A
Anyway,
we
discussed
it
a
lot
before
the
meeting
and
we're
not
really.
We
haven't,
really
landed
on
something.
Yet
this
is
like
a
conflict
between
like
oh
well.
The
modules
should
be
written
in
a
way
where
they're
not
modifying
properties.
A
On
the
node
directly
because
it
breaks
caching,
but
then
there's
also
our
long-standing
like
backwards
compatibility's
important
policy,
which
is
policy
number
one,
and
so
we
may
need
to
find
a
way
to
make
it
work,
even
if
it's
not
ideal,
so
that
that's
kind
of
where
I'm
I'm
sitting
on
this
so
far.
I
think
that
5632
currently
introduces
a
user
interface
for
disabling
per
bundle
type,
and
I
think
oh
it
doesn't.
It
might
just
oh
okay,
well
great.
B
A
Manually,
do
that
got
it
got
it
excellent,
okay!
Well,
anyway,
that
that
sits
kind
of
in
a
good
place.
Then
I
think
that
sounds
perfect
yeah.
But
in
the
meantime,
there's
other
things
and
I
think
jen
raised
a
point.
Something
with
filtering
that
filtering
is
is
a
little
bit
weird
right
now,
because
text
module
the
module
that
provides
like
text
fields
and
the
the
anything
that
has
rich
text.
A
Editors
enabled
on
it
caches
the
filtering
at
load
time
not
at
render
time,
which
is
done
for
performance
reasons,
but
it
also
just
causes
all
kinds
of
confusion
and
bugs
and
all
kinds
of
weird
things,
because
it
really
doesn't
behave.
The
way
in
which
in
which
people
expect
it
also
ends
up
putting
those
property
like
the
cached
text,
into
the
cache
of
the
the
object
when
it
it
shouldn't,
be
there
so
yeah,
it
looks
like
jen
has
a
sub
issue
here
or
related
issue.
56
42.
C
Yeah,
I
copied
it
from
the
outstanding
drupal
network
issue
that
I've
been
working
on
where
now
there's
also
in
the
drupal
issue.
There's
a
link
to
the
decision
made
early
in
drupal
7,
where
they're
like.
Let's
just
move
all
the
filtering
to
the
load
phase,
because
it
makes
drupal
faster
and
nobody
like
stopped
to
think
about
the
potential
repercussions
of
that,
and
that
was
because
drupal
7
was
so
much
slower
than
triple
six.
They
found
this
performance
improvement
and
jumped
on
it.
C
But
in
that
comment
thread
I
think
it
was
why
chad
said
that
the
load
phase
is
not
meant
for
pulling
things
from
the
database,
so
there
might
be
some
confusion
around
what
load
does
for
different
developers,
which
could
be
why
some
people
are
using
load
for
manipulating
and
some
people
are
using
load
for
pulling
from
the
database.
C
C
A
Yeah
I
mean
we
could
double.
I
don't
I'm
hesitant
to
even
suggest
this,
but
if
we
wanted
to
maintain
the
current
kind
of
behavior,
where
there's
certain
properties
that
are
dynamic,
you
know
that
aren't
cached.
We
could
add
a
whole
another
phase.
You
know
post
load
or
something
like
that.
You
know
it's
like
after
the
load,
the
load
is
done.
It
then.
A
C
A
Yeah
but
but
the
thing
is
previously,
we
didn't
have
this
caching
layer
so
doing
stuff
at
load
to
time
was
fine,
because
you
could
count
on
load
always
being
called
now
that
there's
a
cache
there,
the
load
operation
could
get
skipped
or
it
would
be
different,
depending
on
the
state
of
other
things,
yeah
and
so
yeah
we've
entered.
Basically,
we've
made
new
problems
by
by
adding
cache
layer,
which
of
course
is
the
way
that
adding
cache
layers
goes
same.
A
Yeah
well
anyway,
issue
56
42,
you
know,
takes
a
pretty
mod
like
middle
of
the
road
approach
that
it
kind
of
allows
modules
to
make
things
work
the
way
that
they
used
to
if
they
need
it,
which,
by
disabling
the
cache
which,
for
the
time
being,
seems
like
that's
a
pretty
good
compromise.
A
A
Okay,
yeah
I'll
I'll,
try
to
post
a
comment
that
says
you
know
in
writing
what
what
we've
discussed
now
and
and
before
the
meeting,
because
I
think
that
yeah
we
should
get
that
down.
Yeah.
E
B
A
C
B
Yeah
well
so
yeah
it
adds
rg
rgbm
just
zoom
to
me.
It
adds
lines
that
checks
a
new
flag
in
the
end
of
the
info
bundle
patch
and
uses
that
to
decide
whether
to
disable
the
bundle
level
yeah
most
of
the
code
in
the
pr
is
actually
testing,
because
we
didn't
even
test
for
entity
caching.
C
A
A
Okay,
great,
let's
see
all
right,
let's
run
through
the
123
release,
real
quickly,
the
items
that
we
can.
I
mostly
want
to
talk
about
entity
reference
module
issue,
1301
that
has
been
making
some
progress.
Last
week
we
asked
for
more
eyeballs
just
checking
on
this
issue
overall,
because
I
thought
it
was
ready
to
go.
We
got
more
eyeballs,
which
is
fantastic.
Indigozella
came
in
reviewed
some
things
found
out.
A
There
were
some
issues
with
views
and
alejandra
you
jumped
in
as
well
and
said
that
hey
there's
some
pull
requests
that
are
open
that
need
to
be
addressed
so
herb
who's
spearheading
this
whole
operation.
A
He
made
the
changes
in
the
contrib
module,
but
it's
difficult
to
actually
just
get
those
changes
into
the
core
pull
request
now,
because
there's
a
whole
slew
of
git
commands
that
you
have
to
do
in
order
to
get
stuff
into
into
the
pull
request.
So
it's
back
in
his
court
right
now
that
he's
working
to
get
the
pull
request
updated.
I'm
not
sure
if
that
actually
fixes
the
views
problems
that
indigozella
raised
okay,
so
there
could
be
other
issues.
A
Yeah
I'd
like
to
hear
what
other
people
think
about
this
sort
of
thing,
because
it's
like
I
mean,
like
indic
indigozale,
pointed
out
that
there's
more
than
4500
lines
of
code,
4500
lines
of
code
and
there's
bound
to
be
issues
like
bugs
like
this.
And
what
should
we
do
about
that?
I
mean
the
bugs
exist
in
the
contrib
version
too.
Of
course,
yet
hundreds
of
sites
are
using
the
contrib
version.
A
I
I
don't
think
that
we
should
gate
everything
like
you
know
that
the
whole
module
has
to
be
perfect
to
our
understanding
before
we
merge
it
in,
but
it
would
be
good
if
we
established,
if
there's
any
kind
of
threshold
for
like
how
working
it
needs
to
be
before
we
put
it
in
just
to
set
expectations
around.
You
know
where
herb
should
be
putting
his
efforts.
If
he
needs
to
be.
F
Well,
I
think
you
know
entity
reference
is
a
pretty
mature
module,
it
has
a
set
of
tests
already.
I
don't
know
a
little
bit
about
the
history
of
backdrop,
but
it
seems
to
me
that
in
the
past
you
guys
have
actually
incorporated
tokens,
for
example
that
was
contrib
into
core,
and
I
think
you
know
we
kept
fixing
things
after
that,
even
until
recently,
in
some
some
of
the
tokens,
but
that
didn't
impede
the
merging
into
core.
So
I
would
support
merging
entity
reference
into
code.
D
I
think
the
point
we
talked
a
little
bit
about
last
week
too,
was
that
the
sooner
we
get
it
into
cohort,
the
more
people
will
be
the
easier
it
is
for
people
to
sort
of
test
it
and-
and
I
think,
to
move
progress
forward
right.
Like
I,
you
know,
I
was
ready
to
go
test
entity
core
in
core.
A
Yeah,
I
I
think,
there's
a
particular
urgency
for
this
one
because,
unlike
token
module,
where
there's
only
one
token-
and
it
was
like
universally
accepted
as
like
the
solution
to
a
given
problem,
we've
got
this
splitting
that's
happening
between
different
solutions
for
references,
and
we
need
to
clarify
this
like
and
by
putting
it
in
core
that
will
put
one
reference
solution
above
the
others
and
therefore,
like
really
concentrate
our
efforts.
I
think
and
clarify
which
direction
we're
heading.
A
So
I'm
I'm
I'm
of
the
same
opinion.
I
I
think
putting
this
in
sooner
rather
than
later
is
beneficial
and
I
don't
know
still
like
like
where
these
things
should
be.
I
kind
of
kind
of
think
like
there's
already
herb
merged
in
two
things
and
if
he
can
get
his
pull,
requests
updated,
then
fantastic.
A
If
he
comes
back
later
and
says,
I'm
having
a
lot
of
difficulty
figuring
out
how
to
do
this,
then
potentially
we
could
merge,
as
is
and
then
do
follow-ups
if
that's
simpler,
because
the
current
pull
request
is
not
a
typical
one,
because
it
maintains
the
entire
contrib
history
from
drupal
7
from
backdrop,
and
so
it's
several
hundred
commits
long
and
like
just
tacky
on
one
more
commit
could
be
trickier
than
it
seems
then
then
like.
A
If
we
merge
now
and
then
he
just
files,
another
pull
request
that
is
just
literally
like
just
updating
the
stuff
from
contrib
could
be
a
lot
easier.
So
anyway,
maybe
that's
what
I'll
say
I'll
say
something
along
those
lines
that
if
it's
difficult
enough,
then
we
could
even
follow
up
separately.
A
But
okay
sounds
like
more.
All
of
the
opinion.
Sooner
is
better
yeah
jen's,
making
a
little
face
at
that.
No.
C
D
A
Yeah
totally
that's
a.
I
think.
Gregory
frequently
mentions,
like
experimental
modules,
that
this
is
effectively
by
putting
it
in,
but
not
turning
it
on
by
default.
It
kind
of
is
one
of
those
yeah
okay.
Anyway,
it's
really
great
to
see
that
issue
1301
moving
forward.
A
Let's
see,
we
only
have
a
couple
minutes
left
in
these
other
issues.
I
don't
think
that
there's
been
a
real
big
movement
on
tim.
Do
you
want
to
talk
about
hiding
titles
and
comments
at
all
45-69?
Well,.
D
Since
you
have
to
leave
in
two
minutes
and
really
what
I
think
I
need
is
your
feedback-
maybe
it's
best
to
wait
till
next
time.
Okay,
so.
A
Okay,
yeah,
we
kind
of
have
to
wrap
up
here.
Is
there
anything
else
that
anyone
would
like
to
mention.
D
I'll
just
say
on
that
last
issue:
nate.
If
you
have
a
chance
to
look
at
it
and
just
sort
of
say,
if
you
at
least
rule
out
either
of
the
two
approaches.
That
would
be
really
helpful,
because
that's
right
now
that
the
dilemma
has
two
different
approaches,
and
I
I
don't
even
know
if
there
are
legitimately
are
two
approaches
like
one
of
them
might
not
be
possible,
which
would
then
simplify
the
discussion.
D
B
A
All
right:
well,
thanks
everybody
for,
for
joining
this
week,
great
discussions,
great
work,
moving
forward.
A
lot
of
these
issues,
there's
a
lot
more,
of
course,
than
the
ones
that
we
discuss
here,
but
yeah,
I'm
really
happy
to
see
all
the
progress
that's
been
happening
and
and
thanks
moving
forward.
A
I
know
there
is
a
little
bit
of
a
slump
on
the
committing
side.
I
haven't
been
able
to
take
a
look
at
things,
but
yeah.
The
rtbc
list
is
indeed
growing
and
I'll
try
to
at
least
post
some
feedback
to
those
items.